Charilaos Skiadas wrote: > On Feb 24, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > >> The _question_ assumed that, which is why the answers did too. > > Oh yes, I totally agree, the file snippet the OP provided did indeed > assume that, though nothing in the text of his question did, so I > wasn't entirely clear whether the actual file that is going to be > processed has this form or not. So I just wanted to make sure the OP > is aware of this limitation, in case the actual file is more > problematic. > > But most importantly, I wanted to suggest a reevaluation, if > possible, of the process that generates these XML's, and perhaps > fixing that, instead of patching the problem after it has been created.
Also, I wouldn't tolerate R *crashing* in package code on malformed xml input. Jeff -- http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/JeffreyHorner ______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
