It transpires that package survey relies on the current behaviour (which
is not new in 2.6.1: R 2.0.0 did it).
The suggested fix is reasonable if 'data' was originally a data frame, but
the default method promotes vectors to data frames, and the data frame
method used to drop them back to vecto
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Byron Ellis wrote:
> I probably missed this discussion, but why not just ASK the device if
> it is interactive? I can easily imagine a case where a device might be
> interactive or not depending on how it was started. In fact, I don't
> have to imagine a case since the Quartz
> > pkgs <-
> > as.data.frame(available.packages(contrib.url("http://cran.r-project.org";)))
> > pkgs[c("sn", "GOSim", "GammaTest"), c("Package", "Version")]
> Package Version
> sn sn 0.4-4
> GOSim GOSim 1.1.2
> NA
>
> which match CRAN (which doesn't have GammaTest).
On 12/18/07, hadley wickham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/18/07, Deepayan Sarkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12/18/07, hadley wickham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > pkgs <-
> > > > as.data.frame(available.packages(contrib.url("http://cran.r-project.org";)))
> > > > pkgs["sn", c("Pac
On 12/18/07, Deepayan Sarkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/18/07, hadley wickham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > pkgs <-
> > > as.data.frame(available.packages(contrib.url("http://cran.r-project.org";)))
> > > pkgs["sn", c("Package", "Version")]
> >
> > But looking at http://cran.r-project.o
On 12/18/07, hadley wickham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > pkgs <-
> > as.data.frame(available.packages(contrib.url("http://cran.r-project.org";)))
> > pkgs["sn", c("Package", "Version")]
>
> But looking at http://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/ only sn_0.4-2 is
> available. Any ideas?
I see 0.4
> pkgs <-
> as.data.frame(available.packages(contrib.url("http://cran.r-project.org";)))
> pkgs["sn", c("Package", "Version")]
But looking at http://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/ only sn_0.4-2 is
available. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Hadley
--
http://had.co.nz/
___
On 12/18/07, Byron Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I probably missed this discussion, but why not just ASK the device if
> it is interactive?
That's done if the device is open. deviceIsInteractive() takes away
the guessing even when it's not (the use-case is when you type
example(something) wit
I probably missed this discussion, but why not just ASK the device if
it is interactive? I can easily imagine a case where a device might be
interactive or not depending on how it was started. In fact, I don't
have to imagine a case since the Quartz device in R-devel can have
exactly this behavior.
Hi
For all developers of add-on graphics devices: please note the
existence of deviceIsInteractive() for adding your device to the list of
devices for which dev.interactive() returns TRUE. (Available since R
2.6.0; thanks to Brian Ripley I think)
Paul
--
Dr Paul Murrell
Department of Statisti
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Martin Maechler wrote:
> Hi Ivo,
>
>> "IU" == Ivo Ugrina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> on Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:13:10 +0100 writes:
>
>IU> Martin Maechler wrote:
>>> do you have evidence for your belief?
>>> i.e. a set of system.time(.) calls where you see the
Thank you kindly Professor Ripley, Peter Dalgaard and Jari Oksanen.
Although I had searched for Fortran 90 in various R locations, I hadn't
thought to search for Fortran 95, and so hadn't seen Professor Ripley's
reply to John Fox. I just joined this list yesterday, and saw the
December archive
Dear all,
in the Example section of pairs there is
panel.cor <- function(x, y, digits=2, prefix="", cex.cor)
{
usr <- par("usr"); on.exit(par(usr))
par(usr = c(0, 1, 0, 1))
r <- abs(cor(x, y))
txt <- format(c(r, 0.123456789), digits=digits)[1]
txt <
Dear developers
Neither Math.Rd nor Log.Rd mention the branch cuts
that appear for complex arguments. I think it's important
to include such information.
Please find following two context diffs for Log.Rd and Math.Rd.
[The pedants amongst us will observe that
both sqrt() and log() have a branch
> "DM" == Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> on Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:36:48 -0500 writes:
DM> On 12/17/2007 9:06 AM, Oleg Sklyar wrote:
>> Dear Patrick,
>>
>> Firstly, and most importantly, I do not think that your post qualified
>> for Rd! Please use the correct
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Dave Roberts wrote:
> I have been revising some FORTRAN 77 routines in R packages I have
> previously submitted. Since R is now using gfortan I experimented with
> some Fortran 90 code (array intrinsics primarily). So far the code is
> still in F77 fixed format, in files suf
Dave Roberts wrote:
> I have been revising some FORTRAN 77 routines in R packages I have
> previously submitted. Since R is now using gfortan I experimented with
> some Fortran 90 code (array intrinsics primarily). So far the code is
> still in F77 fixed format, in files suffixed .f (not .f90)
I have been revising some FORTRAN 77 routines in R packages I have
previously submitted. Since R is now using gfortan I experimented with
some Fortran 90 code (array intrinsics primarily). So far the code is
still in F77 fixed format, in files suffixed .f (not .f90), but
incorporates some F90
18 matches
Mail list logo
