Martin Maechler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Duncan == Duncan Murdoch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
on Sat, 03 Sep 2005 11:40:18 -0400 writes:
Duncan John Sorkin wrote:
A question for R (and perhaps S and SPlus) historians.
Does anyone know the reason for the inconsistency in
On Sat, 3 Sep 2005, John Sorkin wrote:
A question for R (and perhaps S and SPlus) historians.
Does anyone know the reason for the inconsistency in the way that the
action that should be taken when data are missing is specified? There
are several variants, na.action, na.omit, T, TRUE, etc. I
A question for R (and perhaps S and SPlus) historians.
Does anyone know the reason for the inconsistency in the way that the
action that should be taken when data are missing is specified? There
are several variants, na.action, na.omit, T, TRUE, etc. I know that a
foolish consistency is the
John Sorkin wrote:
A question for R (and perhaps S and SPlus) historians.
Does anyone know the reason for the inconsistency in the way that the
action that should be taken when data are missing is specified? There
are several variants, na.action, na.omit, T, TRUE, etc. I know that a
Duncan == Duncan Murdoch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
on Sat, 03 Sep 2005 11:40:18 -0400 writes:
Duncan John Sorkin wrote:
A question for R (and perhaps S and SPlus) historians.
Does anyone know the reason for the inconsistency in the
way that the action that should be taken
