> We should not mimic S here, sometimes.
> I agree it's wrong in some places.
> But if you use a different scheme, it should be
> - well documented
> - very consequently implemented ==> easily remembered by
users
One way to deal with improvements which force incompatabilities with S
is to layer the code so that application programmers use a consistent
upper layer which in turn calls lower layers of S or R code. This does
not solve problems with existing code but does give a way for new
applications to be developed for both environments. It may not be
possible to always achieve the same results, especially when
improvements mean some capabilities are not in one system, but it can be
possible to make the application work and just not provide some features
in one environment.
Paul Gilbert
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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:
r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
