On 18.11.2011 10:14, Patrick Burns wrote:
Someone ambitious could find problems like
this using random input testing like I talked
about at useR last summer.
http://www.burns-stat.com/pages/Present/random_input_test_annotated.pdf
Testing graphics would be more labor intensive
than the testing
Where is the "like" button when you need it?
Joris Meys wrote:
2011/11/18 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
I don't see how MOSEK is making free software stronger. It's not
encouraging the usage of more free software. It's encouraging the use
of MOSEK. MOSEK should not be endorsed by an organisation
On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 15:30 -0800, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
> Also, "r0" is listed as the revision on:
>
> http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/rdevel.html
> http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/rpatched.html
>
I see these as 2011-11-18 r0 and as built by Duncan Murdoch, who is
Dear R developers,
Print method for function now tries to open the source file associated
with srcref of the function.
It outputs only the warning, if file cannot be open, and forgets to
print the function definition.
Example:
eval(parse(text = "tf <- function(a){
b <- a^4
b
}", srcfi
On Nov 19, 2011, at 04:35 , Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Kevin R. Coombes
> wrote:
>> You can also see the odd behavior without wrapping round in another
>> function:
>>
>>> round(100.1, digits=)
>> [1] 100
>
> Hmm... is there a reason for why the parser accepts t
