[Rd] Please make lowess() generic

[Peter Dalgaard]

Prof Brian Ripley <ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk> writes:

> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Martin Maechler wrote:
> 
> > >>>>> "Greg" == Warnes, Gregory R <gregory_r_warnes at groton.pfizer.com>
> > >>>>>     on Wed, 21 Jan 2004 01:48:15 -0500 writes:
> > 
> >     Greg> As I've mentioned a number of times.  I find it very
> >     Greg> useful to have lowess() become a generic function so
> >     Greg> that a lowess.formula() can be defined.
> > 
> >     Greg> Below is a patch that makes both changes, as well as
> >     Greg> updating the corresponding help documentation.
> > 
> > I think most times you mentioned this, Brian told you that 
> > "loess" was there and was generic and was to be recommended over
> > lowess anyway.
> 
> Not quite: loess() is not generic, but it does have a formula interface
> and it was recommended over lowess() by the authors of both.  (loess()
> is not generic for the reasons I sketch below.)

Not to mention that "lowess" is a speling misteak!

http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/larson/loess.html

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