--- Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Frank, > > After reading carefully again and thinking about some practical examples, I > agree that the current framework has a fundamental and unecessary limitation. > The "point mass at 0, continuous beyond 0" example below does occur in > practical applications (e.g. component lifetimes, 0 = defective). As I said > in a previous post, the distributions package was designed to house commonly > used "parametric" distributions like the ones that are implemented now; but > there is no reason that the framework could not be used to support any kind > of distribution. Therefore, since the change to add a base interface is > small and does not really complicate the structure or client code, I am +0 > for adding it. Any other opinions on this?
+0 from me as well. Al --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
