I wanted to answer a question regarding plotmath but I failed to get my desired substitute output.
My desired output:paste("Hi", paste(italic(yes),"why not?"))
and what I get: paste("Hi", "paste(italic(yes),\"why not?\")")
text<-'paste(italic(yes),"why not?")'
text
[1] "paste(italic(yes),\"why not?\")"
noqoute_text<-noquote(text)
noqoute_text
[1] paste(italic(yes),"why not?")
sub<-substitute(paste("Hi",noqoute_text),
env=list(noqoute_text=noqoute_text))
sub
paste("Hi", "paste(italic(yes),\"why not?\")")
You're using the wrong function, use parse instead of noquote :
text<-'paste(italic(yes),"why not?")'
noquote_text <- parse(text=text)[[1]]
sub<- substitute(paste("Hi",noquote_text),env=list(noquote_text= noquote_text))
# paste("Hi", paste(italic(yes), "why not?"))
noquote just applies a class to an object of type character, with a specific print method not to show the quotes.
str(noquote("a"))
Class 'noquote' chr "a"
unclass(noquote("a"))
[1] "a"
Would you please elaborate on your answer?
In R you ought to be careful about the difference between what's in an object, and what is printed.
What noquote does is :
add "noquote" to the class attribute of the object
That's it
The code is :
function (obj)
{
if (!inherits(obj, "noquote"))
class(obj) <- c(attr(obj, "class"), "noquote")
obj
}
Then when you print it, the methods print.noquote :
Removes the class "noquote" from the object if it's there
calls print with the argument quote = FALSE
that's it
You can actually call print.noquote on a string too :
print.noquote("a")
[1] a
It does print in a similar fashion as quote(a) or substitute(a) would but it's a totally different beast.
In the code you tried, you've been substituting a string instead of a call.
For solving the question I think Moody_Mudskipperss answer works fine, but as you asked for some elaboration...
You need to be careful about different ways similar-looking things are actually stored in R, which means they behave differently.
Especially with the way plotmath handles labels, as they try to emulate the way character-strings are normally handled, but then applies its own rules. The 3 things you are mixing I think:
character() is the most familiar: just a string. Printing can be confusing when quotes etc. are escaped. The function noquote basically tells R to mark it's argument, so that quotes are not escaped.
calls are "unevaluated function-calls": it's an instruction as to what R should do, but it's not yet executed. Any errors in this call don't come up yet, and you can inspect it.
Note that a call does not have its own evironment given with it, which means a call can give different results if evaluated e.g. from within a function.
Expressions are like calls, but applied more generally, i.e. not always a function that needs to be executed. An expression can be a variable-name, but also a simple value such as "why not?". Also, expressions can consist of multiple units, like you would have with {
Different functions can convert between these classes, but sometimes functions (such as paste!) also convert unexpectedly:
noquote does not do that much useful, as Moody_Mudskipper already pointed out: it only changes the printing. But the object basically remains a character
substitute not only substitutes variables, but also converts its first argument into (most often) a call. Here, the print bites you, for when printing a call, there is no provision for special classes of its members. Try it: sub[[3]] from the question gives[1] paste(italic(yes),"why not?")
without any backslashes! Only when printing the full call the noquote-part is lost.
parse is used to transform a character to an expression. Nothing is evaluated yet, but some structure is introduced, so that you could manipulate the expression.
paste is often behaving annoyingly (although as documented), as it can only paste together character-strings. Therefore, if you feed it anything but a character, it firs calls as.character. So if you give it a call, you just get a text-line again. So in your question, even if you'd use parse, as soon as you start pasting thing together, you get the quotes again.
Finally, your problem is harder because it's using plotmaths internal logic.
That means that as soon as you try to evaluate your text, you'll probably get an error "could not find function italic" (or a more confusing error if there is a function italic defined elsewhere). When providing it in plotmath, it works because the call is only evaluated by plotmath, which will give it a nice environment, where italic works as expected.
This all means you need to treat it all as an expression or call. As long as evaluation cannot be done (as long as it's you that handles the expression, instead of plotmath) it all needs to remain an expression or call. Giving substitute a call works, but you can also emulate more closely what happens in R, with
call('paste', 'Hi', parse(text=text)[[1]])
Related
Why can't R find this variable?
assign(paste0('my', '_var'), 2)
get(paste0('my', '_var')) ## isn't this returning an object?
save(get(paste0('my', '_var')), file = paste0('my', '_var.RDATA'))
This throws the error:
Error in save(paste0("my", "_var"), file = paste0("my", "_var.RDATA")) :
object ‘paste0("my", "_var")’ not found
From the help page, the save() function expects "the names of the objects to be saved (as symbols or character strings)." Those values are not evaulated, ie you can't put in functions that will eventually return strings or raw values themselves. Use the list= parameter if you want to call a function to return a string the the name of a variable.
save(list=paste0('my', '_var'), file = paste0('my', '_var.RDATA'))
Though using get/assign is often not a good practice in R. They are usually better ways so you might want to rethink your general approach.
And finally, if you are saving a single object, you might want to consider saveRDS() instead. Often that's the behavior people are expecting when they use the save() function.
The documentation for save says that ... should be
the names of the objects to be saved (as symbols or character strings).
And indeed if you type save into the console you can see that the source has the line
names <- as.character(substitute(list(...)))[-1L]
where substitute captures its argument and doesn't evaluate it. So as the error suggests, it is looking for an object with the name paste0('my', '_var'), not evaluating the expressions supplied.
I work with knitr() and I wish to transform inline Latex commands like "\label" and "\ref", depending on the output target (Latex or HTML).
In order to do that, I need to (programmatically) generate valid R strings that correctly represent the backslash: for example "\label" should become "\\label". The goal would be to replace all backslashes in a text fragment with double-backslashes.
but it seems that I cannot even read these strings, let alone process them: if I define:
okstr <- function(str) "do something"
then when I call
okstr("\label")
I directly get an error "unrecognized escape sequence"
(of course, as \l is faultly)
So my question is : does anybody know a way to read strings (in R), without using the escaping mechanism ?
Yes, I know I could do it manually, but that's the point: I need to do it programmatically.
There are many questions that are close to this one, and I have spent some time browsing, but I have found none that yields a workable solution for this.
Best regards.
Inside R code, you need to adhere to R’s syntactic conventions. And since \ in strings is used as an escape character, it needs to form a valid escape sequence (and \l isn’t a valid escape sequence in R).
There is simply no way around this.
But if you are reading the string from elsewhere, e.g. using readLines, scan or any of the other file reading functions, you are already getting the correct string, and no handling is necessary.
Alternatively, if you absolutely want to write LaTeX-like commands in literal strings inside R, just use a different character for \; for instance, +. Just make sure that your function correctly handles it everywhere, and that you keep a way of getting a literal + back. Here’s a suggestion:
okstr("+label{1 ++ 2}")
The implementation of okstr then needs to replace single + by \, and double ++ by + (making the above result in \label{1 + 2}). But consider in which order this needs to happen, and how you’d like to treat more complex cases; for instance, what should the following yield: okstr("1 +++label")?
Trying to get into Julia after learning python, and I'm stumbling over some seemingly easy things. I'd like to have a function that takes strings as arguments, but uses one of those arguments as a regular expression to go searching for something. So:
function patterncount(string::ASCIIString, kmer::ASCIIString)
numpatterns = eachmatch(kmer, string, true)
count(numpatterns)
end
There are a couple of problems with this. First, eachmatch expects a Regex object as the first argument and I can't seem to figure out how to convert a string. In python I'd do r"{0}".format(kmer) - is there something similar?
Second, I clearly don't understand how the count function works (from the docs):
count(p, itr) → Integer
Count the number of elements in itr for which predicate p returns true.
But I can't seem to figure out what the predicate is for just counting how many things are in an iterator. I can make a simple counter loop, but I figure that has to be built in. I just can't find it (tried the docs, tried searching SO... no luck).
Edit: I also tried numpatterns = eachmatch(r"$kmer", string, true) - no go.
To convert a string to a regex, call the Regex function on the string.
Typically, to get the length of an iterator you an use the length function. However, in this case that won't really work. The eachmatch function returns an object of type Base.RegexMatchIterator, which doesn't have a length method. So, you can use count, as you thought. The first argument (the predicate) should be a one argument function that returns true or false depending on whether you would like to count a particular item in your iterator. In this case that function can simply be the anonymous function x->true, because for all x in the RegexMatchIterator, we want to count it.
So, given that info, I would write your function like this:
patterncount(s::ASCIIString, kmer::ASCIIString) =
count(x->true, eachmatch(Regex(kmer), s, true))
EDIT: I also changed the name of the first argument to be s instead of string, because string is a Julia function. Nothing terrible would have happened if we would have left that argument name the same in this example, but it is usually good practice not to give variable names the same as a built-in function name.
I hope to get some help on the use of quotation marks within a string for get().
Say, I want to retrieve an element from a list
some_list <- list(element1=11,element2=22,element3=33)
naturally, I can simply reference this element through
some_list[['element1']]
However, once I use this as a string within get(), R throws this error message
get("some_list[['element1']]")
> Error in get("some_list[['element1']]") :
object 'some_list[['element1']]' not found
I cannot figure out why this is the case. get() works fine when used with strings that do not have quotation marks within them, e.g.
get("some_list")
I also tried escaping the quotation marks within the string (although I don't this I would need to since they are single quotation marks) but it does not work either.
some_list[["\'"element1"\'"]]
What am I missing.
get won't do that.
some_list[['element1']] isn't the name of an object in an R environment (in a technical sense). When you type some_list[['element1']] at the console, R parses the expression, looks up the symbol some_list and then calls the function [[. get is intended just for the symbol lookup piece of that.
(Technically, my sequence of events there probably isn't right, but I listed them that way to help make the issue clear. Really, R is just parsing the expression, and then calling [[ with arguments some_list and 'element1', and those symbols are subsequently looked up.)
The quotes have nothing to do with it. Run:
get("some_list")[['element1']]
I'm having trouble working with a data table in R. This is probably something really simple but I can't find the solution anywhere.
Here is what I have:
Let's say t is the data table
colNames <- names(t)
for (col in colNames) {
print (t$col)
}
When I do this, it prints NULL. However, if I do it manually, it works fine -- say a column name is "sample". If I type t$"sample" into the R prompt, it works fine. What am I doing wrong here?
You need t[[col]]; t$col does an odd form of evaluation.
edit: incorporating #joran's explanation:
t$col tries to find an element literally named 'col' in list t, not what you happen to have stored as a value in a variable named col.
$ is convenient for interactive use, because it is shorter and one can skip quotation marks (i.e. t$foo vs. t[["foo"]]. It also does partial matching, which is very convenient but can under unusual circumstances be dangerous or confusing: i.e. if a list contains an element foolicious, then t$foo will retrieve it. For this reason it is not generally recommended for programming.
[[ can take either a literal string ("foo") or a string stored in a variable (col), and does not do partial matching. It is generally recommended for programming (although there's no harm in using it interactively).