>
> First: this is not a bug, more a feature request.
[not in R as correctly pointed out, so just for the records:]
It _is_ a bug (in e1071), since svm() is indeed supposed to support
sparse data. The bug was introduced in 1.5-9 I think when support for
correct na-handling was added. The bug wil
Romain Francois free.fr> writes:
>
> Hi,
>
> Has anyone started a javascript device for R.
> I don't see something like that googling or at on
> http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~paul/R/devices.html
> For example, using that graphics library :
> http://www.walterzorn.com/jsgraphics/jsgraphics_e
Hello all
A pragmatic argument for allowing size=3D=3D0 is the situation where the =
size is in itself a random variable (that's how I stumbled over the =
inconsistency, by the way).
For example, in textbooks on probability it is stated that:
If X is Poisson(lambda), and the conditional=20
d
Hello all
A pragmatic argument for allowing size==0 is the situation where the size is in
itself a random variable (that's how I stumbled over the inconsistency, by the
way).
For example, in textbooks on probability it is stated that:
If X is Poisson(lambda), and the conditional
distribut
I had a bumpy ride with this one.
Ruuid/src/Makefile.win refers to src/include, which is not in a binary
distribution so cannot be installed from an installed version of R 2.2.1.
(That's a bug report.)
graph throws an S4 signature error in R-devel.
After fixing those, it works with LazyLoad on
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Robert Gentleman wrote:
> My understanding, and John or others may correct that, is that you need
> SaveImage if you want to have the class hierarchy and generic functions, plus
> associated methods all created and saved at build time.
That meaning the time of using R CMD IN
I think having a generic attach might be useful in the end. But I agree
that some more thought needs to go into how such a generic would behave.
I've always avoided using `attach()' precisely because I didn't fully
understand the semantics.
One related possibility would be to create a method
What are you proposing the generic be, and how should it be described?
Most of the currrent attach seems to be general, the only parts which are
specific to save() images and lists are
value <- .Internal(attach(NULL, pos, name))
load(what, envir = as.environment(pos))
}
What have I started? I had nothing anywhere near as radical as that in mind,
Peter...
One argument against making 'attach' generic might be that such a move would
slow it down a bit, but I can't really see why speed would be much of an issue
with 'attach'.
I've noticed that David Brahm's pack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there any reason why 'attach' is not generic in R?
>
> I notice that it is in another system, for example,
I wonder which one? ;-)
> and I can see some
> applications if it were so in R.
I suppose there is no particular reason, except that it was probably
"good
John,
There are lots of examples without a namespace on CRAN. The first in the
alphabet (in the C locale) is DAAG. Another example (but handled
specially) is package 'datasets'.
Taking the version on CRAN (car_1.0-18) and adding
LazyData: yes
LazyLoad: yes
worked for me (and you don't actua
11 matches
Mail list logo
