This seems a lot faster than using the R sequence function. Suggest
that sequence be rewritten.
On 10/20/06, Marc Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 12:51 -0700, Julian Burgos wrote:
> > Hello fellow R's,
> >
> > I'm sure there must be an easy way to do this. But after d
On 7/22/05, Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> R-help is not the list for R development questions: you didn't want help
> did you? --> moved to R-devel.
>
> I do wonder why
>
> > sequence(c(0,-1))
> [1] 1 0 1 0 -1
>
> is considered useful.
>
> Given that the definition seems fla
I definitely agree that 'sequence' is not the right name
for this functionality. The functionality is occasionally
useful -- I've been asked for it several times. But I do
wonder if it is basic enough that it should be in 'base'.
The function could be rewritten to create the proper
length of the
R-help is not the list for R development questions: you didn't want help
did you? --> moved to R-devel.
I do wonder why
> sequence(c(0,-1))
[1] 1 0 1 0 -1
is considered useful.
Given that the definition seems flawed and I could not find any uses of
this function in any package my reaction
