For the record:
I had an inquiry about a problem with the function lm.fit.recursive in my quantreg package on a 64bit gentoo linux system. After some debugging the problem was traced to the fact that on this system g77 took the view that the statement:
data one/1.0d0/
meant that the symbol one should take the value zero. Replacing such data
statements with their parameter statement equivalent, resolved
the problem. This obnoxious behavior seems not to be news to the gcc folks,
see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2002-08/msg00195.html
but they don't show any inclination to fix it either. I am in the
process of updating my packages and thought that others might
appreciate a warning -- or,more likely, enjoy the schadenfreude of enlightened
C-aphones.
url: www.econ.uiuc.edu/~roger Roger Koenker email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Economics vox: 217-333-4558 University of Illinois fax: 217-244-6678 Champaign, IL 61820
______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
