Peter Dalgaard wrote:
It might have (and I wouldn't mind replacing Jitterbug with something
that is actually maintained itself!),
Being somewhat overwhelmed at the moment, I read this quickly as
"maintains itself," and thought that would be pretty neat.
Back on earth, and speaking with no insi
> For CRAN to list changes to other packages would require cooperation
> from all the package developers. If the maintainer of acepack isn't
> sufficiently together to reply to your messages, he probably won't be
> keeping up with other aspects of change tracking. Even trying to
> extract a NEWS o
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:13:42 + (GMT)
Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:17:39 + (GMT)
> > Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Are you sure there is a measurable difference in callin
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:17:39 + (GMT)
> Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Are you sure there is a measurable difference in calling methods
> > directly? The dispatch overhead on formula (one of your uses) appears to
> > be about
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:17:39 + (GMT)
Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you sure there is a measurable difference in calling methods
> directly? The dispatch overhead on formula (one of your uses) appears to
> be about 10 microseconds. (Note, negligible even for 10,000
> boots
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:10:36 -0800 (PST)
Thomas Lumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>
> >
> > It seems the sort of thing you do is to call methods directly where
> > you could equally well call the generic, since that is what is
> > currently failing
Are you sure there is a measurable difference in calling methods directly?
The dispatch overhead on formula (one of your uses) appears to be about
10 microseconds. (Note, negligible even for 10,000 bootstraps.)
I believe we took the real performance penalties into account (and
namespaces had per
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>
> It seems the sort of thing you do is to call methods directly where you
> could equally well call the generic, since that is what is currently
> failing in Design and Hmisc (if survfit.km is a survfit method).
Technically survfit.km() isn't a surv
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:09:58 + (GMT)
Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:47:52 -0500
> > Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:33:10 -0500, you wrote:
> > >
> > > >I a
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:18:47 -0500, Paul Gilbert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
>Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
>> but they'll still have access via CRAN to
>> older versions of your package.
>
>Are you sure about that? I can't find old contributed packages, but it
>wouldn't be the first time I've missed
> "PaulG" == Paul Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> on Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:18:47 -0500 writes:
PaulG> Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>> but they'll still have access via CRAN to
>> older versions of your package.
PaulG> Are you sure about that? I can't find old contributed packages
Duncan Murdoch wrote:
but they'll still have access via CRAN to
older versions of your package.
Are you sure about that? I can't find old contributed packages, but it
wouldn't be the first time I've missed something obvious.
(src/contrib/Old is hardly a complete archive.)
Paul
___
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:47:52 -0500
> Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:33:10 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> > >I also share your views about namespaces. These have caused numerous
> > >problems for me. It would be n
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 07:51:34 -0500, Frank E Harrell Jr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
>On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:47:52 -0500
>Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Changes always show up in r-devel (the main CVS branch, not the
>> mailing list) first. Package developers should be keeping a
>> r
> A lot of wishlist suggestions need at least cooperation from R-core, who
> may not agree that a change is desirable even if someone else were to
> write the code. A bug-tracking system for contributed packages is one
> of the exceptions. There's nothing to stop some package developer(s)
> create
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:47:52 -0500
Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:33:10 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >I also share your views about namespaces. These have caused numerous
> >problems for me. It would be nice to have more of a mechanism to put
> >"feelers" out to the
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:33:10 -0500, you wrote:
>I also share your views about namespaces. These have caused numerous
>problems for me. It would be nice to have more of a mechanism to put
>"feelers" out to the R user community when major changes are planned.
Changes always show up in r-devel (t
Fernando Henrique Ferraz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A.J. Rossini writes:
>> That's my point. Maintainance is critical, and any time spent on
>> systems administration (systems in the generic sense, here it's
>> bug-tracking) is less time spent on other more useful, or interesting,
>> or high-p
A.J. Rossini writes:
> That's my point. Maintainance is critical, and any time spent on
> systems administration (systems in the generic sense, here it's
> bug-tracking) is less time spent on other more useful, or interesting,
> or high-payoff items.
>
> I'm probably not the only one who wished P
Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A.J. Rossini) writes:
>
>> Bugzilla is a pain-in-the-arse to maintain, unless they've improved it
>> in the last 9 months. Just my two cents...
>
> It might have (and I wouldn't mind replacing Jitterbug with something
> that is actua
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004, Fernando Henrique Ferraz wrote:
> Frank E Harrell Jr writes:
> > Let me add to the wish list the creation of some mechanism to better track
> > improvements and bug fixes in packages, such as a change log link by each
> > package's area in CRAN, or easy access to CVS informati
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (A.J. Rossini) writes:
> Bugzilla is a pain-in-the-arse to maintain, unless they've improved it
> in the last 9 months. Just my two cents...
It might have (and I wouldn't mind replacing Jitterbug with something
that is actually maintained itself!), but there's another rear-end
Bugzilla is a pain-in-the-arse to maintain, unless they've improved it
in the last 9 months. Just my two cents...
best,
-tony
Fernando Henrique Ferraz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Frank E Harrell Jr writes:
>> Let me add to the wish list the creation of some mechanism to better track
>> impro
Frank E Harrell Jr writes:
> Let me add to the wish list the creation of some mechanism to better track
> improvements and bug fixes in packages, such as a change log link by each
> package's area in CRAN, or easy access to CVS information from there.
> When I report bugs (e.g., in read.xport in f
Kevin,
I was glad to see your list. Some of the items were reasons for creating
some of the functions in Hmisc. summarize and mApply in conjunction with
llist handle labeling of output - this is actually quite tricky and the
Hmisc solution isn't perfect. Dropping unused factor levels by default
Hi,
Consider the row.names of
a <- data.frame(x = runif(15))
> row.names(a)[8:12]
[1] "8" "9" "1e+05" "11" "12"
not wrong, but there's room for improvement. If we replace the
expression
if (length(row.names) == 0)
row.names <- seq(length = nr
26 matches
Mail list logo
