On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 02:05, Pages, Herve wrote:
>
> On 1/7/20 06:13, brodie gaslam via R-devel wrote:
> ...
> > Happy new decade.
>
> *** caught segfault ***
> conflicting decade boundaries
https://xkcd.com/2249/ ;-)
>
> Traceback:
> 1: new_decade <- 2020:2029
> 2: previous_decade <- 2011
On 1/7/20 06:13, brodie gaslam via R-devel wrote:
...
> Happy new decade.
*** caught segfault ***
conflicting decade boundaries
Traceback:
1: new_decade <- 2020:2029
2: previous_decade <- 2011:2020
3: previous_previous_decade <- 2001:2010
4: current_millenium <- 2001:3000
5: previous_
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 6:14 AM brodie gaslam via R-devel
wrote:
>
> For whatever my 2c are worth I think this would be nice. I'm still
> uncomfortable at having to call `options` in my package `diffobj` to set
> output width.
Adding a few more cents: It might be worth considering "who" should
For whatever my 2c are worth I think this would be nice. I'm still
uncomfortable at having to call `options` in my package `diffobj` to set output
width.
And since the topic is here, what about `show`? Feels like it should accept
`...` so that it too could be given some set of standard or no
Thank you: the R Language Definition is very helpful.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 3:18 PM Abby Spurdle wrote:
> Do you just need something on pen and paper?
> (In which case, I don't see why it needs to be "standard").
>
> Or do you need something that can be used with bison/yacc/cup/etc to
> produce
One of the things I often wish R would work with:
When calling print() explicitly --- as I do not so rarely, e.g.,
specifying digits = ---
it sometimes seems awkward that from the printing options() ,
one can specify 'digits' and it has default digits = NULL which is
documented to be equivalent
