On 8/6/06, Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a case to be made for this? If so, where is it? > > (I don't find x[lower.tri(x)] harder to write than lower.tri(x, > value=TRUE), and wonder why you do?
The reasons are 1. x might be the result of an expression. Without value= one must store the result of that expression in a variable, x, first: x <- outer(1:6, 1:6, "+") x[lower.tri(x)] but with the proposed value= argument one could just use function composition: lower.tri(outer(1:6, 1:6, "+"), value = TRUE) 2. the whole object approach of R encourages working with the objects themselves rather than indexes and value= is consistent with that. ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
