On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Dan Tenenbaum wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Henrik Bengtsson"
>> To: "Dan Tenenbaum"
>> Cc: "R-devel"
>> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 12:21:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Rd] OSX Yosemite (10.10): Are package binaries the same as for
>> OSX Mav
Just to anticipate future discussion from math purists (and hopefully
not to throw too much of a wrench in the works), what would be the
return of:
is.whole(-1)
or
is.whole(-1L)
?
I can see arguments for both TRUE and FALSE from both the math purity
group and the "what will happen when I try t
> Therneau, Terry M , Ph D
> on Tue, 28 Oct 2014 07:44:20 -0500 writes:
> Martin,
> I can't imagine using such a function myself, the reason being that as
Bill and Duncan
> point out, the correct answer depends on the situation.
yes, of course.
OTOH, if the function is
Martin,
I can't imagine using such a function myself, the reason being that as Bill and Duncan
point out, the correct answer depends on the situation.
But given the regular reappearance of this topic, I think that perhaps creation of your
function is a good idea, largely to function as a rep
On 28/10/2014, 5:32 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
> Diverted to R-devel, as I'm requesting comments about a proposal
> to add is.whole() to R just so this issue does not trail on for
> centuries (;-), see below.
>
I didn't read the thread in question, but I think Bill's comment is
crucial: what pro
Diverted to R-devel, as I'm requesting comments about a proposal
to add is.whole() to R just so this issue does not trail on for
centuries (;-), see below.
> William Dunlap
> on Sat, 18 Oct 2014 10:33:05 -0700 writes:
> 3. all.equal(a, as.integer(a))
> Note that this one test
