>>>>> "RichOK" == Richard A O'Keefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> on Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:56:48 +1300 (NZDT) writes:
RichOK> I asked:
>> In this discussion of seq(), can anyone explain to me
>> _why_ seq(to=n) and seq(length=3) have different types?
RichOK> Martin Maechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RichOK> replied: well, the explantion isn't hard: look at
RichOK> seq.default :-)
RichOK> That's the "efficient cause", I was after the "final
RichOK> cause". That is, I wasn't asking "what is it about
RichOK> the system which MAKES this happen" but "why does
RichOK> anyone WANT this to happen"?
sure, I did understand you quite well -- I was trying to joke
and used the " :-) " to point the joking ..
MM> now if that really makes your *life* simpler,
MM> what does that tell us about your life ;-) :-)
{ even more " :-) " !! }
RichOK> It tells you I am revising someone else's e-book
RichOK> about S to describe R. The cleaner R is, the easier
RichOK> that part of my life gets.
of course, and actually I do agree for my life too,
since as you may believe, parts of my life *are* influenced by R.
Apologize for my unsuccessful attempts to joking..
RichOK> seq: from, to, by, length[.out], along[.with]
MM> I'm about to fix this (documentation, not code).
RichOK> Please don't. There's a lot of text out there:
RichOK> tutorials, textbooks, S on-inline documentation, &c
RichOK> which states over and over again that the arguments
RichOK> are 'along' and 'with'.
you meant
'along' and 'length'
yes. And everyone can continue to use the abbreviated form as
I'm sure nobody will introduce a 'seq' method that uses
*multiple* argument names starting with "along" or "length"
(such that the partial argument name matching could become a problem).
RichOK> Change the documentation, and people will start
RichOK> writing length.out, and will that port to S-Plus?
RichOK> (Serious question: I don't know.)
yes, as Peter has confirmed already.
Seriously, I think we wouldn't even have started using the ugly
".with" or ".out" appendices, wouldn't it have been for S-plus
compatibility {and Peter has also given the explanation why there
*had* been a good reason for these appendices in the past}.
Martin
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
