From p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk  Wed Aug 15 21:40:02 2007
From: p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk (Peter Dalgaard)
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:40:02 +0200
Subject: [Rd] [Fwd: behavior of L-BFGS-B with trivial function triggers
 bug in stats4::mle]
In-Reply-To: <46C34CF0.2090402@zoo.ufl.edu>
References: <46C0D1FF.3020005@zoo.ufl.edu>
	<20070814182635.GB29808@cs.cas.cz>	<loom.20070814T203613-433@post.gmane.org>	<46C1FF19.7000003@biostat.ku.dk>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0708151932240.31744@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
	<46C34CF0.2090402@zoo.ufl.edu>
Message-ID: <46C35692.9060002@biostat.ku.dk>

Ben Bolker wrote:
> Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>   
>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Ben Bolker wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Petr Savicky <savicky <at> cs.cas.cz> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Could you also include a script, which reproduces the problem? Just
>>>>> to see under which conditions the problem occurs and how it
>>>>> looks like exactly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Petr Savicky.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>   The original post has such a script, just under the dashed line
>>>> and above the diff/patch.  Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Patch inserted in r-devel now.
>>>       
>> And all optim() methods now work on zero-length 'par'.
>>
>>     
>   So my patch would now seem to be unnecessary -- keep it for 
> belt-and-suspenders purposes,
> or remove it to minimize code complexity?
>
>   
Isn't broken, do not fix. We can always call it an optimization, 
avoiding unnecessary calls to optim ;-) ....



[Rd] [Fwd: behavior of L-BFGS-B with trivial function triggers bug in stats4::mle]
Peter Dalgaard