mark.braving...@csiro.au wrote:
The syntax for returning multiple arguments does not strike me as
particularly appealing. would it not possible to allow syntax like:
f= function() { return( rnorm(10), rnorm(20) ) }
(a,d$b) = f()
FWIW, my own solution is to define a
Why? Can you demonstrate any situations where its useful? Despite
having my own facility for this I've found that over the years I
have never used it.
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:23 AM, ivo...@gmail.com wrote:
Gentlemen---these are all very clever workarounds, but please forgive me for
voicing
Gentlemen---these are all very clever workarounds, but please forgive me
for voicing my own opinion: IMHO, returning multiple values in a
statistical language should really be part of the language itself. there
should be a standard syntax of some sort, whatever it may be, that everyone
hi gabor: this would be difficult to do. I don't think you want to
read my programs. it would give you an appreciation of what ugly
horror programs end users can write in the beautiful R language ;-).
clearly, one can work around the lack of such a feature.
multiple-return values are syntax
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:38 AM, ivo welch ivo...@gmail.com wrote:
hi gabor: this would be difficult to do. I don't think you want to
read my programs. it would give you an appreciation of what ugly
horror programs end users can write in the beautiful R language ;-).
clearly, one can work
Dear list,
Did the wish for an official API for evaluating expressions while
keeping an eye on the R_Visible flag (see:
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2007-April/045258.html
) lead to something ?
I could not find a sign of it the current (R-2.8.1 and R-2.9-dev) R defines.
Thanks,
ivo...@gmail.com wrote:
Gentlemen---these are all very clever workarounds,
hacks around the lack of a feature
but please forgive me for voicing my own opinion: IMHO, returning
multiple values in a statistical language should really be part of the
language itself.
returning multiple values
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk
waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
ivo...@gmail.com wrote:
Gentlemen---these are all very clever workarounds,
hacks around the lack of a feature
but please forgive me for voicing my own opinion: IMHO, returning
multiple values in
Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:38 AM, ivo welch ivo...@gmail.com wrote:
hi gabor: this would be difficult to do. I don't think you want to
read my programs. it would give you an appreciation of what ugly
horror programs end users can write in the beautiful R language
Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
as gabor says in another post, you probably should first show why having
multiple value returns would be useful in r. however, i don't think
there are good counterarguments anyway, and putting on you the burden of
proving a relatively obvious (or not so?) thing is a
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk
waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no wrote:
Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
as gabor says in another post, you probably should first show why having
multiple value returns would be useful in r. however, i don't think
there are good
One idea of program design is that users
should be protected against themselves.
It is my experience that users, especially
novices, tend to over-split items rather than
over-clump items. The fact that items are
returned by the same function call would
argue to me that there is a connection
Patrick Burns wrote:
One idea of program design is that users
should be protected against themselves.
It is my experience that users, especially
novices, tend to over-split items rather than
over-clump items. The fact that items are
returned by the same function call would
argue to me that
Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
I've provided an argument against it and no one has provided one
for it. The so-called identical code Ivo showed was not identical
and, in fact, was flawed.
no, you're wrong. you think of the part where ivo shows what he'd like
to have; the example i was
Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
- this still does not allow one to use the names directly, only as
L$first etc., with the syntactic and semantic (longer lookup times) penalty;
That's how it should be done. Using the auto split you get many
variables which is not desirable. it encourages bad
Thomas Petzoldt wrote:
Patrick Burns wrote:
One idea of program design is that users
should be protected against themselves.
... and r coherently implements this idea :]
It is my experience that users, especially
novices, tend to over-split items rather than
over-clump items. The fact
Full_Name: Manikandan Narayanan
Version: 2.8.1
OS: Linux
Submission from: (NULL) (155.91.45.231)
Here is an excerpt from qpois help page (?qpois):
The quantile is left continuous: 'qgeom(q, prob)' is the largest
integer x such that P(X = x) q.
I think the qgeom here should be
17 matches
Mail list logo
