Please, Jose, do NOT misuse R-devel for such questions!
There's R-help (and many good books on R and maybe your local R expert)
for asking such questions.
Definitely *not* the R-devel mailing list.
-- http://www.R-project.org/mail.html , the posting guide, etc.
Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich
Dear developers,
I just noticed that step() function currently prints the current model
using message(), but the resulting model using print(). The relevant
commands within the step() body are:
if (trace) message(Start: AIC=, format(round(bAIC, 2)), \n,
I was working on a permutation-like variant of the bootstrap for smaller
samples, and wanted to be able to get summary stats of my estimator
conveniently. mean() is OK as its a generic, so a mean.oddboot function gets
used automatically. But var, sd and others are not originally written as
On Wed, 9 May 2007, S Ellison wrote:
I was working on a permutation-like variant of the bootstrap for smaller
samples, and wanted to be able to get summary stats of my estimator
conveniently. mean() is OK as its a generic, so a mean.oddboot function
gets used automatically. But var, sd and
Brian,
If we make functions generic, we rely on package writers implementing the
documented
semantics (and that is not easy to check). That was deemed to be too
easy to get wrong for var().
Hard to argue with a considered decision, but the alternative facing increasing
numbers of package
Dear all,
it looks like fix() changes the class of mts objects, here is a reproducible
example (tested both on WinXP and Linux):
x - ts(cbind(1:5,1:5))
x
Time Series:
Start = 1
End = 5
Frequency = 1
Series 1 Series 2
111
222
333
44
I agree that wider use of generics in the core of R is desirable as
it facilitates designs in various addon packages that are much easier
to use. In the absence of generics, the addon package either has to
clobber/mask the version in the core, which really is unacceptable, or define
a different
Why did you expect otherwise?: fix() is treating it as matrix and
?edit.matrix says that it only works on 'simple data frames' (and converts
matrices to such).
Editing R objects can easily change aspects of them, as dput() is not
faithful, environments can get lost and so on.
On Wed, 9 May
On Wed, 9 May 2007, S Ellison wrote:
Brian,
If we make functions generic, we rely on package writers implementing
the documented semantics (and that is not easy to check). That was
deemed to be too easy to get wrong for var().
Hard to argue with a considered decision, but the
On Wed, 9 May 2007, Simone Giannerini wrote:
My concern here is that users can be confused from the fact that if one has
a single time series fix() uses the default method of edit() and does not
change
its class
x - ts(1:5)
fix(x)
class(x)
[1] ts
whereas for mts objects edit.data.frame
My concern here is that users can be confused from the fact that if one has
a single time series fix() uses the default method of edit() and does not
change
its class
x - ts(1:5)
fix(x)
class(x)
[1] ts
whereas for mts objects edit.data.frame is used so that in my opinion it
might be worth to
I think that a simple statement mentioning the issue in the documentation of
fix() would be helpful.
regards
Simone
On 5/9/07, Prof Brian Ripley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2007, Simone Giannerini wrote:
My concern here is that users can be confused from the fact that if one
Simone Giannerini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My concern here is that users can be confused from the fact that if one has
a single time series fix() uses the default method of edit() and does not
change
its class
x - ts(1:5)
fix(x)
class(x)
[1] ts
whereas for mts objects
Perhaps this has to do with the fact that there is not enough
information available
to establish the class of those columns. For example, try this:
read.table(clipboard, colClasses = character)
On 5/9/07, John Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear r-devel list members,
I stumbled across the
Jeffrey J. Hallman wrote:
Prof Brian Ripley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 9 May 2007, S Ellison wrote:
Brian,
If we make functions generic, we rely on package writers implementing
the documented semantics (and that is not easy to check). That was
deemed to be too easy to get
The generics don't have to be S4. In fact, in many cases it would
be better to have them be S3 for consistency with other similar generics
in the core of R.
Or I wonder about the possibility of having generics which can have
some methods being of S3 and others of S4.
On 5/9/07, Robert Gentleman
Dear Brian (and Gabor),
Thanks -- that makes sense.
John
John Fox, Professor
Department of Sociology
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario
Canada L8S 4M4
905-525-9140x23604
http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox
-Original
17 matches
Mail list logo
