On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Romain Francois
rom...@r-enthusiasts.com wrote:
Hi,
Sure. I could and I would provide a patch. Since this is more of a nice to
have, I wanted to first find out whether others would find it useful, and
also if such a patch would have chances to get accepted by
Le 31/05/10 10:41, Barry Rowlingson a écrit :
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Romain Francois
rom...@r-enthusiasts.com wrote:
Hi,
Sure. I could and I would provide a patch. Since this is more of a nice to
have, I wanted to first find out whether others would find it useful, and
also if such
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Barry Rowlingson
b.rowling...@lancaster.ac.uk wrote:
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Romain Francois
rom...@r-enthusiasts.com wrote:
Hi,
Sure. I could and I would provide a patch. Since this is more of a nice to
have, I wanted to first find out whether
Hi Romain,
not that I have any authority here, but wouldn't your suggestion (which
I think could be very useful) be more powerful if it were accompanied by
a patch that could be applied to the R sources?
Best wishes
Wolfgang Huber
EMBL
http://www.embl.de/research/units/genome_biology/huber
Hi,
Sure. I could and I would provide a patch. Since this is more of a nice
to have, I wanted to first find out whether others would find it
useful, and also if such a patch would have chances to get accepted by
one of R-core members.
Sometimes patches I or others provide upfront are not
Hello,
I often find myself writing code like :
if( require( foo ) compareVersion( packageDescription(
foo)[[Version]], 2.1 ) 0 ){
# code that uses version 2.1 of foo
} else {
stop( could not load version = 2.1 of foo )
}
Would it make sense to include something like this
