[Rd] Documentation for is.atomic and is.recursive

[Stavros Macrakis]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Duncan Murdoch<murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
> On 02/09/2009 4:10 PM, Stavros Macrakis wrote:
...
>> I would nonetheless claim that the documentation as currently written
>> is at best ambiguous and confusing, and would benefit from improved
>> wording.
>
> A claim that documentation would benefit from improved wording is a
> tautology.  A claim that the documentation is ambiguous requires more
> evidence than you've offered.  You have demonstrated that someone could be
> confused when reading it, but that isn't necessarily our responsibility.

Of course not.  I forgot.  This is r-devel: the user is always wrong,
the developer is always right.

           -s