John Chambers wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > setClass('foo')
> > [1] "foo"
> > > setMethod('is.logical', 'foo', function(x) TRUE)
> > [1] "is.logical"
> > > getGeneric('is.integer')
> > Error in options(x) : evaluation is nested too deeply: infinite
> > recursion?
>
> This is on
Saikat DebRoy wrote:
>
> On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 16:17 US/Eastern, John Chambers wrote:
>
> > As a heuristic, setting methods for language-related primitives is
> > dangerous (also a little strange?).
>
> Yes. But if it is allowed, someone will do it. It may actually make
> sense to come up
On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 16:17 US/Eastern, John Chambers wrote:
As a heuristic, setting methods for language-related primitives is
dangerous (also a little strange?).
Yes. But if it is allowed, someone will do it. It may actually make
sense to come up with an appropriate (and preferably small)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > setClass('foo')
> [1] "foo"
> > setMethod('is.logical', 'foo', function(x) TRUE)
> [1] "is.logical"
> > getGeneric('is.integer')
> Error in options(x) : evaluation is nested too deeply: infinite
> recursion?
This is one of a number of potential problems when meth
> setClass('foo')
[1] "foo"
> setMethod('is.logical', 'foo', function(x) TRUE)
[1] "is.logical"
> getGeneric('is.integer')
Error in options(x) : evaluation is nested too deeply: infinite
recursion?
>
--please do not edit the information below--
Version:
platform = i686-pc-linux-gnu
arch
