Thanks, I've committed the change.
Duncan Murdoch
On 6/17/2005 10:30 AM, Deepayan Sarkar wrote:
> On 6/17/05, Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 6/17/2005 8:58 AM, Deepayan Sarkar wrote:
>> > I think there are a couple of things in ?hist that are not quite as
>> > clear as they could be.
>> >
>> > (1)
>> >
>> > freq: logical; if 'TRUE', the histogram graphic is a representation
>> > of frequencies, the 'counts' component of the result; if
>> > 'FALSE', _relative_ frequencies ("probabilities"), component
>> > 'density', are plotted. Defaults to 'TRUE' _iff_ 'breaks'
>> > are equidistant (and 'probability' is not specified).
>> >
>> > Unless I'm missing something, the 'density' component is NOT relative
>> > frequency or 'probability' in any reasonable sense, country-specific
>> > biases notwithstanding, except in the very special case where
>> > all(diff(breaks) == 1). Thus, the above description is confusing and
>> > probably even wrong.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> > Also, it seems to me that hist cannot draw a relative frequency
>> > histogram at all (which is not a bad thing, but it's of course very
>> > important to the undergrads we're teaching intro stats and R to). This
>> > should be explicitly mentioned.
>>
>> I'm not sure about this. Is it really worth mentioning something if you
>> can't do it? Are you thinking of just giving a reference to barplot?
>
> Not mentioning it is fine.
>
>> > (2)
>> >
>> > breaks: one of:
>> >
>> > ...
>> > * a single number giving the number of cells for the
>> > histogram,
>> > ...
>> >
>> > This is not quite true. 'breaks' is used in 'pretty', so it's more a
>> > suggestion than an exact specification. I'm not sure whether or not
>> > the behaviour should be changed (what's the point of having ``pretty''
>> > breakpoints anyway?), but if not, the documentation should be
>> > clarified.
>>
>> I like the pretty breakpoints. It is good to label the breakpoints, and
>> ugly to have labels at other than pretty points. I'd clarify by
>> changing "giving" to "suggesting".
>
> Actually, I missed the remark just below this:
>
> In the last three cases the number is a suggestion only.
>
> so this is fine as it is.
>
>> > I'll be happy to provide a patch if these changes are considered
>> > reasonable.
>>
>> Please do.
>
> Here's the output of svn diff. Is this a reasonable way of providing a patch?
>
> Index: hist.Rd
> ===================================================================
> --- hist.Rd (revision 34748)
> +++ hist.Rd (working copy)
> @@ -28,9 +28,9 @@
> }
> \item{freq}{logical; if \code{TRUE}, the histogram graphic is a
> representation of frequencies, the \code{counts} component of
> - the result; if \code{FALSE}, \emph{relative} frequencies
> - (\dQuote{probabilities}), component \code{density},
> - are plotted. Defaults to \code{TRUE} \emph{iff} \code{breaks} are
> + the result; if \code{FALSE}, probability densities, component
> + \code{density}, are plotted (so that the histogram has a total area
> + of one). Defaults to \code{TRUE} \emph{iff} \code{breaks} are
> equidistant (and \code{probability} is not specified).}
> \item{probability}{an \emph{alias} for \code{!freq}, for S compatibility.}
> \item{include.lowest}{logical; if \code{TRUE}, an \code{x[i]} equal to
>
> Deepayan
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
