Brian,
> Note that ?bxp quite carefully says which graphical pars it does and does
> not accept, and 'xlim' is one it does not accept.
In my version at the time, bxp did not list which plot parameters it does not
accept. xlim was simply not mentioned at all. I can't easily see lack of a
mentio
On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Note that ?bxp quite carefully says which graphical pars it does and does
> not accept, and 'xlim' is one it does not accept. So this is a wish, not
> a bug.
>
> The easy part is to allow it to accept 'xlim' is specified. The harder
> part is to fin
Note that ?bxp quite carefully says which graphical pars it does and does
not accept, and 'xlim' is one it does not accept. So this is a wish, not
a bug.
The easy part is to allow it to accept 'xlim' is specified. The harder
part is to find a good default of xlim in general. Steve's suggesti
On 6/26/2007 8:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Full_Name: Steve Ellison
> Version: 2.4.1
> OS: Windows, Linux
> Submission from: (NULL) (194.73.101.157)
>
>
> bxp() allows specifcation of box locations with at=, but neither adjusts xlim=
> to fit at nor does it respect xlim provided explicitly.
On 6/26/2007 8:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Full_Name: Steve Ellison
> Version: 2.4.1
> OS: Windows, Linux
> Submission from: (NULL) (194.73.101.157)
That version is obsolete, but this problem is still present in R-devel.
I'll take a look.
Duncan Murdoch
>
>
> bxp() allows specifcation
Full_Name: Steve Ellison
Version: 2.4.1
OS: Windows, Linux
Submission from: (NULL) (194.73.101.157)
bxp() allows specifcation of box locations with at=, but neither adjusts xlim=
to fit at nor does it respect xlim provided explicitly.
This is because bxp() now includes explicit xlim as c(0.5, n+
