On 2/15/11 4:35 PM, "Gabor Grothendieck" wrote:
>I think the real good programming practice is to have a single point
>of exit at the bottom.
I disagree, it can be extremely useful to exit early from a function. It
can also make the code much more clear by not having 95% of the body in a
huge
On 2/11/11 1:39 PM, "Ben Bolker" wrote:
>[snip]
> Original Message
>Subject: read.csv trap
>Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 11:16:36 -0500
>From: Ben Bolker
>To: r-de...@stat.math.ethz.ch , David Earn
>
>
>[snip]
>What is dangerous/confusing is that R silently **wraps** longer lines i
On 2/4/11 9:01 AM, "Simon Urbanek" wrote:
>I'd argue that if a user attempts to install a package from sources
>instead of using the distribution binaries, he should know what he's
>doing as there is much more involved (proper tools, usually a different
>library location etc.).
Most of the
Very nice. I think this is a great idea too.
--
Ken Williams
Senior Research Scientist
Thomson Reuters
Phone: 651-848-7712
ken.willi...@thomsonreuters.com
http://labs.thomsonreuters.com
On 2/2/11 2:00 AM, "GONG-YI LIAO" wrote:
>Hi,
>
> I am doing a small experiment to test if I can use
For the complex-numbers bug, do you know a reliable way (besides looking
at version numbers) to determine whether the bug is present or absent in a
given build?
I don't know what version of gcc was used in my build nor the optimization
flags, so I did a few test exponentiations z^n and the resul
But suppose I want to write something like: "this package is 10 million
times better than my other package [Foo] because that one will eat your
children" - or "in contrast to the package [Bar], this package is for
continuous data, while that one is for discrete data, so they don't
interoperate".
I
