Re: [Rd] An introduction to R - language is R or S ?

From: Prof Brian Ripley <ripley_at_stats.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon 11 Oct 2004 - 06:00:39 EST


On Sun, 10 Oct 2004, Michele Alzetta wrote:

> I have done a diff between R 2.0 and R 1.9 versions of 'An
> introduction to R'. I notice that line 196 of R-intro.texi now calls
> the language used in R 'S', and not 'R' any longer. I imagine there
> must be a reason for this, it is not a simple mistake is it ?

Which, the original or the change?

R-intro has been out of step with the FAQ (see e.g. Q3.1 and Q3.3) for a long time, so I would say the previous usage was `a simple mistake'. (In fact it seems to have been a global editing job on Bill Venables' words which were written about the S language.)

-- 
Brian D. Ripley,                  ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics,  http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford,             Tel:  +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road,                     +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK                Fax:  +44 1865 272595

______________________________________________
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Received on Mon Oct 11 06:06:12 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed 03 Nov 2004 - 22:45:21 EST