Sorry, I need to change my last post.
I looked at this a bit more, and realized that increasing the (max)
number of (name) digits is only relevant in some cases.
For people computing quartiles and deciles, this shouldn't make any difference.
Therefore, should still be convenient for the purposes o
CITED TEXT CONTAINS EXCERPTS ONLY
> and now we read more replies on this topic without anyone looking at
> the pure R source code which is pretty simple and easy.
> Instead, people do experiments and take time to muse about their findings..
> Honestly, I'm disappointed: I've always thought that if
Hi All,
Based upon a discussion on power/sample size calculations on another, non-R
related, list, some light bulbs went on regarding the assumptions of what type
of statistical test is going to be used with various power/sample size
calculators/functions for proportions. In some cases, this is
> Gabriel Becker
> on Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:23:00 -0800 writes:
> Hi Edgar, I certainly don't think quantile(x, .975) should
> return 980, as that is a completely wrong answer.
> I do agree that it seems like the name is a bit
> offputting. I'm not sure how deep in the
