[R-pkg-devel] Macros in Rd files.

I tried to define a macro to produce today's date (like unto the 
"\today" command in LaTeX):

\newcommand{\today}{format(Sys.date(),"%d/%m/%Y")}

I put this into my *.Rd file just before invoking it.? (Something like
"I don't think I will do any more work today (i.e. \today).")

When I did

 ??? R CMD build ldEst

to my package I got the warning:

Warning: 
/tmp/RtmpL6sNnQ/Rbuild7f3036693218/ldEst/man/sampleCiLength.Rd:95:
unexpected END_OF_INPUT '\keyword{ datagen }

Clearly I'm stuffing something up.? Can some kind soul please provide me 
with guidance as to what I *should* be doing?

Ta.

cheers,

Rolf Turner

Note the % may be a comment?

Uwe


On 09.11.2017 06:05, Rolf Turner wrote:

I tried to define a macro to produce today's date (like unto the
"\today" command in LaTeX):

\newcommand{\today}{format(Sys.date(),"%d/%m/%Y")}

I put this into my *.Rd file just before invoking it.? (Something like
"I don't think I will do any more work today (i.e. \today).")

When I did

  ??? R CMD build ldEst

to my package I got the warning:

Warning:
/tmp/RtmpL6sNnQ/Rbuild7f3036693218/ldEst/man/sampleCiLength.Rd:95:
unexpected END_OF_INPUT '\keyword{ datagen }

Clearly I'm stuffing something up.? Can some kind soul please provide me
with guidance as to what I *should* be doing?

Ta.

cheers,

Rolf Turner

Note the % may be a comment?

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out 
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

 ?\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out 
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

 ?\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

... Mr. Speaker.

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

  ?\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Did that, and it worked like a charm.  However when I do the "R CMD
build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

"Normally" one just gets the line "* building the PDF package manual"
and nothing else, and "R CMD build" just carries on cruising.

Evidently defining a macro in the *.Rd file triggers the extra elaboration.

It's no big deal of course, but I just thought I'd ask:

(a) Is there anything to worry about in this respect?

(b) Is there anything different that I should be doing?

(c) Is there anyway of suppressing the (ever-so-slightly annoying)
extra screen output?

I guess that's really three supplementary questions ....

Thanks for any pointers.

cheers,

Rolf

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

  ?\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Now that is a bit more subtle!  I don't understand what "written in Rd
markup" really means, and I don't understand the "\Sexpr" construction.
I'd seen it when looking at the example macros in

     /usr/local/lib64/R/share/Rd/macros/system.Rd

but I figured if you know nothing about it, don't mess with it.

Is there anywhere that I could read up about writing "in Rd markup"?

Anyway, thanks for giving me the recipe, which is what I really need.

cheers,

Rolf

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

  ?\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Now that is a bit more subtle!  I don't understand what "written in Rd
markup" really means, and I don't understand the "\Sexpr" construction.
I'd seen it when looking at the example macros in

     /usr/local/lib64/R/share/Rd/macros/system.Rd

but I figured if you know nothing about it, don't mess with it.

Is there anywhere that I could read up about writing "in Rd markup"?

Anyway, thanks for giving me the recipe, which is what I really need.

cheers,

Rolf

 ...  when I do the "R CMD

build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

"Normally" one just gets the line "* building the PDF package manual"
and nothing else, and "R CMD build" just carries on cruising.

Evidently defining a macro in the *.Rd file triggers the extra 
elaboration.

It's no big deal of course, but I just thought I'd ask:

(a) Is there anything to worry about in this respect?

Of course, never ignore diagnostics.? Worry about every line that was 
printed!

(b) Is there anything different that I should be doing?

Sounds like it...

(c) Is there anyway of suppressing the (ever-so-slightly annoying)
extra screen output?

Oooh, that's such a bad idea.? Don't do that.? Fix the problem that led 
to the output.

On 10/11/17 12:00, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

[Rolf Turner wrote:]

 ...  when I do the "R CMD

build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

"Normally" one just gets the line "* building the PDF package manual"
and nothing else, and "R CMD build" just carries on cruising.

Evidently defining a macro in the *.Rd file triggers the extra
elaboration.

It's no big deal of course, but I just thought I'd ask:

(a) Is there anything to worry about in this respect?

Of course, never ignore diagnostics.  Worry about every line that was
printed!

(b) Is there anything different that I should be doing?

Sounds like it...

(c) Is there anyway of suppressing the (ever-so-slightly annoying)
extra screen output?

Oooh, that's such a bad idea.  Don't do that.  Fix the problem that led
to the output.

Trouble is, I don't (a) know if this really *is* a problem, or (b) if it
is, any idea of how to work out how to fix it.

I would like to know if it is "an expected phenomenon".  Does it happen to
other people?  I.e. is there anyone out there who has defined their
own macro in a *.Rd file, and if so, do *they* get a plethora of LaTeX
messages when they do "R CMD build" to the package in question?

I'd love to hear from you! :-)

cheers,

Rolf

--
Technical Editor ANZJS
Department of Statistics
University of Auckland
Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276

A github search might be helpful to identify packages that define macros 
in their Rd files:
https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=user%3Acran+extension%3Ard+newcommand&type=Code

On 10/11/17 13:10, Fran?ois Michonneau wrote:

A github search might be helpful to identify packages that define 
macros in their Rd files:
https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=user%3Acran+extension%3Ard+newcommand&type=Code 

Thanks.? Looking into it.

cheers,

Rolf

http://developer.r-project.org/parseRd.pdf

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out 
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.

This worked for me:

  ?
\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Now that is a bit more subtle!  I don't understand what "written in Rd 
markup" really means, and I don't understand the "\Sexpr" construction.
I'd seen it when looking at the example macros in

     /usr/local/lib64/R/share/Rd/macros/system.Rd

but I figured if you know nothing about it, don't mess with it.

Is there anywhere that I could read up about writing "in Rd markup"?

Anyway, thanks for giving me the recipe, which is what I really need.

cheers,

Rolf

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out 
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and 
error.

This worked for me:

??\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Did that, and it worked like a charm.? However when I do the "R CMD 
build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and 
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

"Normally" one just gets the line "* building the PDF package manual"
and nothing else, and "R CMD build" just carries on cruising.

Evidently defining a macro in the *.Rd file triggers the extra elaboration.

It's no big deal of course, but I just thought I'd ask:

(a) Is there anything to worry about in this respect?

(b) Is there anything different that I should be doing?

(c) Is there anyway of suppressing the (ever-so-slightly annoying)
extra screen output?

I guess that's really three supplementary questions ....

Usage: R CMD build [options] pkgdirs

Build R packages from package sources in the directories specified by
?pkgdirs?

Options:
  -h, --help        print short help message and exit
  -v, --version        print version info and exit

  --force               force removal of INDEX file
  --keep-empty-dirs     do not remove empty dirs
  --no-build-vignettes  do not (re)build package vignettes
  --no-manual           do not build the PDF manual even if \Sexprs are present
...
...
... 

... However when I do the "R CMD  build" thing, when it comes to the 
"* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and 
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Note the % may be a comment?

Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R.? Working out 
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and 
error.

This worked for me:

??\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\\%m/\\\%Y")}}

Did that, and it worked like a charm.? However when I do the "R CMD 
build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and 
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

"Normally" one just gets the line "* building the PDF package manual"
and nothing else, and "R CMD build" just carries on cruising.

Evidently defining a macro in the *.Rd file triggers the extra elaboration.

It's no big deal of course, but I just thought I'd ask:

(a) Is there anything to worry about in this respect?

(b) Is there anything different that I should be doing?

(c) Is there anyway of suppressing the (ever-so-slightly annoying) 
extra screen output?

I guess that's really three supplementary questions ....

Usage: R CMD build [options] pkgdirs

Build R packages from package sources in the directories specified by 
?pkgdirs?

Options:
  -h, --help        print short help message and exit
  -v, --version        print version info and exit

  --force               force removal of INDEX file
  --keep-empty-dirs     do not remove empty dirs
  --no-build-vignettes  do not (re)build package vignettes
  --no-manual           do not build the PDF manual even if \Sexprs are present
...
...
... 

It is more subtle than that.
\Sexpr triggers the creation of "partial Rd database" which becomes part of the built package (the tar.gz file), although what exactly happens may also depend on 'stage' options of the \Sexpr's.

... However when I do the "R CMD  build" thing, when it comes to the
"* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.

I have never seen  "* building the PDF package manual" from 'R CMD build', see below for a sample console output on Windows from a package which contains Rd macros and vignettes.

The messages you show seem to come from 'Rd2pdf'. Is it possible that you have some custom script that builds the manual, as well?

Usage: R CMD build [options] pkgdirs

Build R packages from package sources in the directories specified by
?pkgdirs?

Options:
   -h, --help        print short help message and exit
   -v, --version        print version info and exit

   --force               force removal of INDEX file
   --keep-empty-dirs     do not remove empty dirs
   --no-build-vignettes  do not (re)build package vignettes
   --no-manual           do not build the PDF manual even if \Sexprs are present
...
...
...