On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 1:57 AM, Peter Dalgaard pda...@gmail.com wrote:
Hadley Wickham wrote:
I would be more inclined to make sampling from a vector the normal case,
and default x to say 1:max(n, size), forcing users to say sample(n=5) if
sampling from x=1:5 is desired. This could be a
There is a weakness in the 'sample'
function that is highlighted in the
help file. The 'x' argument can be
either the vector from which to sample,
or the maximum value of the sequence
from which to sample.
This can be ambiguous if the length of
'x' is one.
I propose adding an argument that
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org
[mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Burns
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2010 3:08 AM
To: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: [Rd] proposed change to 'sample'
There is a weakness in the 'sample'
function
William Dunlap wrote:
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org
[mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Burns
I propose adding an argument that allows
the user (programmer) to avoid that
ambiguity:
function (x, size, replace = FALSE, prob =
I would be more inclined to make sampling from a vector the normal case,
and default x to say 1:max(n, size), forcing users to say sample(n=5) if
sampling from x=1:5 is desired. This could be a manageable change; the
deprecation sequence is a bit painful to think through, though.
Don't we
-Original Message-
From: Peter Dalgaard [mailto:pda...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2010 2:12 PM
To: William Dunlap
Cc: Patrick Burns; r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] proposed change to 'sample'
William Dunlap wrote:
-Original Message-
From: r-devel-boun
Hadley Wickham wrote:
I would be more inclined to make sampling from a vector the normal case,
and default x to say 1:max(n, size), forcing users to say sample(n=5) if
sampling from x=1:5 is desired. This could be a manageable change; the
deprecation sequence is a bit painful to think through,
