On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:27:23 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
[...]
judging from your question, you couldn't possibly see sorting
routines in other languages.
Quite likely, or the other languages that I regularly use
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
i am sending *no* patch for this. the issue has to be first discussed
on the design level, and only then, if accepted, should anyone -- me,
for example -- make an attempt to implement it. tell me you want to
listen to what i have to say, and we can discuss.
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:39:51 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
[...]
why not read some fortunes?
I am well aware of those fortunes and maybe you missed the one:
fortune(Watson)
Getting flamed for
Dimitris Rizopoulos wrote:
in my opinion the point of the whole discussion could be summarized by
the question, what is a design flaw? This is totally subjective, and
it happens almost everywhere in life. Take human languages as an
example and in particular, English. I do not know the history
G'day Dimitris,
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:19:15 +0100
Dimitris Rizopoulos d.rizopou...@erasmusmc.nl wrote:
in my opinion the point of the whole discussion could be summarized
by the question, what is a design flaw? This is totally subjective,
and it happens almost everywhere in life. [...]
On 24-Feb-09 13:14:36, Berwin A Turlach wrote:
G'day Dimitris,
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:19:15 +0100
Dimitris Rizopoulos d.rizopou...@erasmusmc.nl wrote:
in my opinion the point of the whole discussion could be summarized
by the question, what is a design flaw? This is totally subjective,
WK == Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no
on Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:31:13 +0100 writes:
WK Dimitris Rizopoulos wrote:
in my opinion the point of the whole discussion could be summarized by
the question, what is a design flaw? This is totally subjective, and
...
My earlier email requires too much reading between the lines. This one puts
the finger more closely on the issues: There are historical inconsistencies
and there are design flaws. Naturally, there often is an overlap, but there
is also a clear area of excellence. These are largely different
Dimitris Rizopoulos wrote:
in my opinion the point of the whole discussion could be summarized by
the question, what
is a design flaw? This is totally subjective, and it happens almost
everywhere in life.
This [what constitutes a design flaw, and the suggestion that all design
flaws are
Stavros Macrakis wrote:
...sort(list(...))), I'd hope that wouldn't break existing code. [...]
...sort is a generic function, and for sort(list(...)) to work, it would
have to dispatch to a function called sort.list;... such a function exists
already and it is not for sorting
Wacek Kusnierczyk wrote:
btw. it's interesting that in revision 38438 (2006) Prof Brian Ripley
introduced (or so does the commit message say) sorting complex numbers,
and now you have things like:
1i 0i
# Error in 0+0i 0+1i : invalid comparison with complex values
sort(c(1i,
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:52:05 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
G'day Stavros,
snip
In many cases, the orthogonal design is pretty straightforward.
And in the cases where the
Dear vQ,
vectors (can-be-considered-lists),
can you please stop repeating this nonsense? I don't think anybody
ever claimed that vectors can be considered list. It's rather the
other way round: lists can also be seen as vectors to R (possibly they
are implemented as such, but I don't
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:31:16 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:52:05 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
[...]
and you mean that sort.list not being applicable to lists is a)
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
snip
can you give one concrete example, and suggest how to estimate how
much old code would involve the same issue?
Check out the svn source of R, run configure, do whatever change you
want to sort.list, make, make check FORCE=FORCE. That should give
you an
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:27:08 +0100
Wacek Kusnierczyk waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
snip
can you give one concrete example, and suggest how to estimate how
much old code would involve the same issue?
Check out the svn source of R, run
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
it's not just making changes to sort.list, berwin. sort.list calls
.Internal order, and this one would have to be modified in order to
accommodate for the additional comparator argument. [...]
Well, you could start of with an R only implementation and then
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Berwin A Turlach
ber...@maths.uwa.edu.au wrote:
G'day Stavros,
Hello, Berwin,
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:50:13 -0500
Stavros Macrakis macra...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
...sort(list(...))), I'd hope that wouldn't break existing code. [...]
...sort is a generic
g'orning,
Berwin A Turlach wrote:
G'day Stavros,
snip
In many cases, the orthogonal design is pretty straightforward. And
in the cases where the operation is currently an error (e.g.
sort(list(...))), I'd hope that wouldn't break existing code. [...]
This could actually be an
19 matches
Mail list logo
