> It seems the distribution used for your tests is maximally favourable to > your proposal (not uncommon in papers, but not very honest).
I did not have time to do a thorough test. I was simply reporting what I had done so any implied dishonesty is unfair to me. > Changing how this is done will break the reproducibility of past programs, > and we don't really want to introduce yet more options. So it seems only > worth doing when there are substantial speed gains. I agree that Walker's method may be slow at some cases but there is nothing to brag about R's current method either. The bottom line is: a bisection method will be uniformly better than the linear search method that R uses right now. This does not qualify as 'substantial speed gain' though. Cheers, Bo ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
