Subject: Re: ts and defaults
From: Prof Brian D Ripley (email@example.com)
Date: Sat 07 Aug 1999 - 07:24:13 EST
On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Paul Gilbert wrote:
[quoting me without attribution]
> >Do you want us to change ts in R not to be the constructor
> >of the ts class, and thereby `break a lot of user code' in R?
> No, I want you to change the name of your new improved class of time series and
> leave "ts" alone or make it even more compatible with S.
I asked a very specific question and got an ambiguous answer. `make it
even more compatible with S' means `yes', not `no', as in S ts() is not the
constructor of a ts class. Which do you want?
-- Brian D. Ripley, firstname.lastname@example.org 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 272860 (secr) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: email@example.com _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue 04 Jan 2000 - 14:16:07 EST