to:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Peter Ehlers
>> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 3:48 AM
>> To: r-help@r-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [R] Using seq_len() vs 1:n]
>>
>> Pat Burns makes a good point. -Peter
>>
>> Original Message
-Original Message-
> From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org
> [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Peter Ehlers
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 3:48 AM
> To: r-help@r-project.org
> Subject: Re: [R] Using seq_len() vs 1:n]
>
> Pat Burns makes a good p
Pat Burns makes a good point. -Peter
Original Message
Subject: Re: [R] Using seq_len() vs 1:n
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:01:20 +
From: Patrick Burns
To: Peter Ehlers
References: <4b746aef.10...@ucalgary.ca>
If you want your code to be compatible with
S+, then &#
Nonclinical Biostatistics
-Original Message-
From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On
Behalf Of Duncan Murdoch
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 1:41 PM
To: Peter Ehlers
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] Using seq_len() vs 1:n
On 11/02/2010 3
On 11/02/2010 3:39 PM, Peter Ehlers wrote:
R-people,
Duncan Murdoch's response in
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2010-February/227869.html
reminded me of something I had been meaning to ask.
A while ago I started using
for(i in seq_len(v)) {}
in preference to
for(i in 1:n)
On 12/02/2010, at 9:39 AM, Peter Ehlers wrote:
> R-people,
>
> Duncan Murdoch's response in
>
> https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2010-February/227869.html
>
> reminded me of something I had been meaning to ask.
>
> A while ago I started using
>
> for(i in seq_len(v)) {}
>
> in pr
R-people,
Duncan Murdoch's response in
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2010-February/227869.html
reminded me of something I had been meaning to ask.
A while ago I started using
for(i in seq_len(v)) {}
in preference to
for(i in 1:n) {}
Duncan's post shows that if n can be z
7 matches
Mail list logo
