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

[Duncan Murdoch]

On 03/09/2009 5:36 PM, Stavros Macrakis wrote:
> 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.

Yes, you want r-whinge.  That's down the hall.

Duncan Murdoch