On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, t.d. kaplan wrote:
> hi,
>
> i am trying to create a plot of reduced height. i am able to achieve
> this with:
>
> par(pin=c(par("pin")[1], 1))
>
> however, the plot is surrounded by large margins. is there a way for
> me to reduce the margins to match the dimensions of the pl
hi,
i am trying to create a plot of reduced height. i am able to achieve
this with:
par(pin=c(par("pin")[1], 1))
however, the plot is surrounded by large margins. is there a way for
me to reduce the margins to match the dimensions of the plot?
thanks.
_
verified -- jan
On Jan 27, 2007, at 14:01 , Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Jan de Leeuw wrote:
>
>> Switching the icc compiler flag from -O3 to -O0 for deriv.c solves
>> the problem. As I said, I have to do that for regex.c as well.
>>
>
> Just for the record - the latte
On Jan 26, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Jan de Leeuw wrote:
> Switching the icc compiler flag from -O3 to -O0 for deriv.c solves
> the problem. As I said, I have to do that for regex.c as well.
>
Just for the record - the latter is due to a bug in the regex code:
one of the functions is declared "pure
This is a report on an obsolete version of R, on a problem that existed in
_only_ that version and has already been fixed in the current release
(and in R-patched before it).
Please learn the courtesy and respect that both the posting guide and FAQ
ask for in not abusing the project's resources
Full_Name: Rick Sayre
Version: 2.4.0
OS: Windows
Submission from: (NULL) (138.72.27.164)
PKG_LIBS works fine on *nix
on windows, it seems to be ignored by the "SHLIB" script
so, R CMD SHLIB blah
properly uses PKG_CPPFLAGS and PKG_CFLAGS from Makevars, but PKG_LIBS is
ignored
Hi everybody. I myself am not subscribed for Rd therefore replying late.
As the author of EBImage, I'd like to comment on the issue.
As Tony correctly writes one can generally use nargs() to get the number
of arguments, and this works for "["(x,i,j,...,drop) method as well. The
problem I had wi
It does not help, except to show that your original report was not a
true reflection of the situation, and that you are not willing to give
the more information that we did ask for, namely the saved image.
When I do what you said you did, there is no reference to 'lattice' in the
saved image.
