Hi
Florian Hahne wrote:
> Hi everybody,
> I just notice a strange behaviour of gpar's fill argument when using
> non-postscript devices:
> The default of the argument is transparent (according to get.gpar("fill")).
> So as expected, the following code draws a nice red rectangle in the
> middle
Yet the methodology of my prior post seems to pick out the
correct one:
a <- c(Amateur = 5230,
Amature = 280,
Amatuer = 266,
Ameteur = 619000,
Ameture = 941000,
Ametuer = 574000)
plot(lm(log(a) ~ 1), which = 2)
On 12/8/05, Tony Plate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would be wary of ta
I would be wary of taking frequency of misspelling as an indication of
"correctness".
Witness the following Google counts:
Amateur (correct): 52,300,000
Amature: 2,800,000
Amatuer: 2,660,000
Ameteur: 619,000
Ameture: 941,000
Ametuer: 574,000
Here's a common misspelling at > %10
Collectible (co
This makes it pretty clear which are the meaningful ones:
g <- structure(c(5070, 75200, 573, 836, 1020, 349, 1850, 530,
352, 576, 589, 618, 349, 652), .Names = c("Gibraltar", "Gibralta",
"Gibraltr", "Gibralar", "Gibratar", "Gibrltar", "Gibaltar", "Giraltar",
"Gbraltar", "ibralter", "Gibralatar
Hi everybody,
I just notice a strange behaviour of gpar's fill argument when using
non-postscript devices:
The default of the argument is transparent (according to get.gpar("fill")).
So as expected, the following code draws a nice red rectangle in the
middle of my X11 or postscript device.
pushV
On 08-Dec-05 Martin Maechler wrote:
>> "Torsten" == Torsten Hothorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> on Thu, 8 Dec 2005 08:51:57 +0100 (CET) writes:
>
> Torsten> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> >> I've often wondered about that.
> Torsten> and the copy editor did too :
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, roger koenker wrote:
> I was experimenting yesterday with a binomial make.link option
> for estimating student t binary response models, tentatively
> called gossit, and I noticed eventually that the R qt function doesn't
> like df < 1. Vaguely recalling that Splus didn't seem
roger koenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was experimenting yesterday with a binomial make.link option
> for estimating student t binary response models, tentatively
> called gossit, and I noticed eventually that the R qt function doesn't
> like df < 1. Vaguely recalling that Splus didn't see
I'm with Martin: When I get the same number of hits for two
spellings, I believe that both are acceptable. When I get substantially
different numbers of hits, I generally go with the one with the most
hits -- unless the different spellings carry different meanings, of
course.
I was experimenting yesterday with a binomial make.link option
for estimating student t binary response models, tentatively
called gossit, and I noticed eventually that the R qt function doesn't
like df < 1. Vaguely recalling that Splus didn't seem to mind such
weirdness, I checked on our soon to
> "Torsten" == Torsten Hothorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> on Thu, 8 Dec 2005 08:51:57 +0100 (CET) writes:
Torsten> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>> I've often wondered about that.
Torsten> and the copy editor did too :-)
>> I've presumed that the names were
11 matches
Mail list logo
