On 7/5/06, Simon Urbanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 5, 2006, at 2:23 PM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > > > On 7/5/06, Simon Urbanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I don't think ad hominem arguments and unsupported statements that > > things "make no sense" or analogies to screwdrivers have any > > relevance to this discussion. > > I was hoping that it will help you understand the point, apparently I > was wrong. > > > > I think by this time I have shown that subclassing of environments > > does not work > > No, you didn't. Your example demonstrates that subclassing works > correctly and exactly as expected.
I have repeatedly seen people claiming in relation to various topics regarding R that simply being consistent with the documentation makes it "correct". Some of these discussions have, in the past, bordered on ridiculous since everyone who encounters these problems knows there are problems with the design. The discussion here is that the current design has an undesirable property and that an alternate design would remove that problem. ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
