[Rd] This mail was found after problem with mailserver Oct 3rd - postmaster@hh.umu.se

[Peter Dalgaard BSA]

maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch writes:

> Ok, I've fixed pretty() for the development version
> such that
>      p <- pretty(x)
>      all(p[1] <= x & x <= p[2])
> 
> should be guaranteed (again).

Gulp. I'm pretty(!) sure there was a reason for changing it in the
other direction... [I have a vague recollection of pretty(pretty(x))
!= pretty(x) or something like that] Are we quite sure that it is not
the caller that needs to be a little more lenient in the bounds
checking?

OTOH, it's in code you wrote yourself...

-- 
   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk)             FAX: (+45) 35327907
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
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
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
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
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._