[Rd] NOTE: multiple local function definitions for ?fun? with different formal arguments
Izmirlian, Grant (NIH/NCI) [E]
|zm|r||g @end|ng |rom m@||@n|h@gov
Sun Feb 4 16:55:13 CET 2024
Well you can see that yeast is exactly weekday you have. The way out is to just not name the result
toto <- function(mode)
{
ifelse(mode == 1,
function(a,b) a*b,
function(u, v, w) (u + v) / w)
}
________________________________
From: Grant Izmirlian <izmirlidroid using gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Feb 4, 2024, 10:44 AM
To: "Izmirlian, Grant (NIH/NCI) [E]" <izmirlig using mail.nih.gov>
Subject: Fwd: [EXTERNAL] R-devel Digest, Vol 252, Issue 2
Hi,
I just ran into this 'R CMD check' NOTE for the first time:
* checking R code for possible problems ... NOTE
toto: multiple local function definitions for �fun� with different
formal arguments
The "offending" code is something like this (simplified from the real code):
toto <- function(mode)
{
if (mode == 1)
fun <- function(a, b) a*b
else
fun <- function(u, v, w) (u + v) / w
fun
}
Is that NOTE really intended? Hard to see why this code would be
considered "wrong".
I know it's just a NOTE but still...
Thanks,
H.
--
Herv� Pag�s
Bioconductor Core Team
hpages.on.github using gmail.com<mailto:hpages.on.github using gmail.com>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are confident the content is safe.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
More information about the R-devel
mailing list