Hi Martin,
Thanks and apologies for not seeing that. I had checked NEWS but not tried
it in R devel.
Thanks again.
Josh
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Martin Maechler wrote:
> > Joshua Wiley
> > on Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:19:16 +1100 writes:
>
> > Hi, I realize this is an old
> Joshua Wiley
> on Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:19:16 +1100 writes:
> Hi, I realize this is an old thread, but just wondering
> whether a conclusion was ever reached on this issue? I'm
> using formula(NULL) but it would be nice if default
> initialization worked for formula cl
Hi,
I realize this is an old thread, but just wondering whether a conclusion
was ever reached on this issue? I'm using formula(NULL) but it would be
nice if default initialization worked for formula classes as well.
Cheers,
Josh
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
> Thanks M
Thanks Martin for looking into this. H.
On 05/13/2015 03:57 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Hervé Pagès
on Tue, 12 May 2015 15:18:42 -0700 writes:
Hi,
The man page for new() suggests that if 'a' is an object with slots
"slot1" and "slot2" and C is a class that extends the class of 'a',
t
> Hervé Pagès
> on Tue, 12 May 2015 15:18:42 -0700 writes:
> Hi,
> The man page for new() suggests that if 'a' is an object with slots
> "slot1" and "slot2" and C is a class that extends the class of 'a',
> then the 2 following calls should be equivalent:
>new("C", a, ...)
>
Hi,
The man page for new() suggests that if 'a' is an object with slots
"slot1" and "slot2" and C is a class that extends the class of 'a',
then the 2 following calls should be equivalent:
new("C", a, ...)
new("C", slot1=a@slot1, slot2=a@slot2, ...)
This is generally the case but I just ran
