Clifford Long <gnolffilc <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> Dear R-help,
>
> I am told by Professor Ripley that my question (quote) wastes the time
> of (and has insulted on-list) the R developers by falsely claiming
> there are problems with their code. I am writing, as he instructed,
> to publicly apologize to the R developers for any slight that my
> question might have generated.
>
> When posing my question, I genuinely thought that by invoking "plot"
> that it was a Base R graphics package that I was using, and not that
> offered by Mr. Ryan.
>
> As I am told that I owe an apology, I would like to do as I was
> instructed and publicly apologize on the list to the R developers, but
> not for any malicious intent, but rather for my lack of expertise and
> any unintentional insult that resulted. (My apologies also to Mr.
> Ryan for my ignorance.)
>
Your post did not look insulting to me, just mildly (and understandably)
misinformed.
It looks to me like this is a bug in plot.xts, which has the code
dots <- list(...)
if ("axes" %in% names(dots)) {
if (!dots$axes)
axes <- FALSE
}
else axes <- TRUE
This would make sense if axes were *not* in the explicit list
of arguments to the function, and the default was supposed to be
TRUE. Because axes *is* in the explicit list of arguments, this
overrides it. I would contact the maintainer [maintainer("xts")] and
ask if this is a bug.
cheers
Ben Bolker
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
