Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono
2018-Mar-17 11:53 UTC
[Rd] Inappropriate parens fix for Logic.Rd
Logic.Rd has been changed again in r74377. After change: ? \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors (i.e., of ? ? types \code{\link{double}} (class \code{\link{numeric}}, ? ? \code{\link{integer}}) and \code{\link{complex}}), or objects for It is still inappropriate. As I said before, integer is not double. Right: numeric includes double and integer Wrong: double includes numeric and integer The text mentions "type" and "class". I believe that, in the text, originally, "type" refers to what is returned by typeof() and "class" refers to what is returned by class() in R. When typeof(x) is "double", class(x) is "numeric". When typeof(x) is "integer", class(x) is "integer". --------------------------------------------> wrote:Subject: Inappropriate parens fix for Logic.Rd To: r-devel at r-project.org Date: Saturday, 10 March, 2018, 8:23 AM Logic.Rd is one of the files changed in r74363. Before change: ? \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors (i.e., of types ? ? \code{\link{double}} (class \code{\link{numeric}}), \code{\link{integer}} ? ? and \code{\link{complex}})), or objects for After change: ? \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors (i.e., of types ? ? \code{\link{double}} (class \code{\link{numeric}}, \code{\link{integer}} ? ? and \code{\link{complex}})), or objects for Neither integer nor complex is double. I think, it should be ? \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors (i.e., of types ? ? \code{\link{double}} (class \code{\link{numeric}}), \code{\link{integer}} ? ? and \code{\link{complex}}), or objects for
>>>>> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> >>>>> on Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:53:28 +0000 writes:> Logic.Rd has been changed again in r74377. After change: ? > \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors > (i.e., of ? ? types \code{\link{double}} (class > \code{\link{numeric}}, ? ? \code{\link{integer}}) and > \code{\link{complex}}), or objects for > It is still inappropriate. As I said before, integer is > not double. > Right: numeric includes double and integer Wrong: double > includes numeric and integer > The text mentions "type" and "class". I believe that, in > the text, originally, "type" refers to what is returned by > typeof() and "class" refers to what is returned by class() > in R. When typeof(x) is "double", class(x) is "numeric". > When typeof(x) is "integer", class(x) is "integer". It's amazing that we've not done better .. I've tried again now. Thank you Suharto! Martin
Possibly Parallel Threads
- Coercion of 'exclude' in function 'factor' (was 'droplevels' inappropriate change)
- 'droplevels' inappropriate change
- Inappropriate class(o)[!inherits(o,"AsIs")] in get_all_vars
- Inappropriate class(o)[!inherits(o,"AsIs")] in get_all_vars
- 'droplevels' inappropriate change