On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 18:33 +0100, Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > Marc Schwartz (via MN) wrote: > <snipped> > > I was more focused (and confused) on the Rgui.exe menus as the principal > > justification for taking this approach, but again, perhaps I am lacking > > context. > > I think you are confused about Rgui.exe, versus "having a GUI for R" > (which is what I wrote - I never wrote "Rgui.exe", as that was *not* > what I meant all along).
Indeed. I stand corrected on that point, given your comments above and now going back to look at your prior posts. This helps to clarify my mis-perception. > I did try but failed with the Sciview-R - > it would install but won't run. Since the actual GUI faq is hosted > by sciview on "http://www.sciviews.org/_rgui/"; as you pointed out, > by association, my first guess was that it is a good bet to try > the Sciview-R one first. > > If anybody can name a "better" GUI than sciview-R, windows or linux, > I am all ears - "better" in any sense of the word, preferably > not in the ESS sense, as I already have that - nothing obviously > against it, but I like alternatives, preferably covering different > usage areas. If you are so motivated, you might consider subscribing to and contributing to the R-SIG-GUI list: https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-gui As I mentioned in the post I just sent, this is a cooperative "venture" in which things happen because people selflessly contribute their time and energy to make it happen. > Before anybody jump in again, the fact that sciview-R is somewhat .NET > framework dependent (at least the binary installed by the > default installer seems to be) is justifiably a development issue? HTH, Marc ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
