On 26/04/2014, 3:36 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
On 25 Apr 2014, at 14:50 , peter dalgaard <pda...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks. I've put in a bug report on this one now, so it shouldn't get missed
again. If nobody else gets to it first I'll deal with it.
I don't see any value in fixing the compareVersion example, but if someone
submits a bug report about it, someone else might fix it.
No point in clinging to obviously incorrect code either. Fixed in R-devel.
Peter
Notice that I haven't touched Sweave, just compareVersion. The RE's may well be incorrect
for Sweave, but the obvious fix was tried in r64087 and broke "make" when
building vignettes,
hence the reversion in r64100. (See R-devel mails from Oct 23, 2013 if
you care.)
The issue in this case was that the Sweave.Rnw vignette gave a verbatim
illustration of \Sexpr{}, relying on the bug to prevent it from being
expanded. After a bit more testing, I'll re-commit the fixes.
Duncan Murdoch
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
