Packages and Libraries (was: Re: lme4 "package" etc {Re: [R] lme4 --> GLMM}

[A.J. Rossini]

For OBVIOUS reasons, is there any chance that we could introduce
"package()" and deprecate "library()"?

(well, I'll also ask if we could deprecate "=" for assignment, but
that's hopeless).

best,
-tony


On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:49:39 +0100, Martin Maechler
<maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote:
> >>>>> "Pavel" == Pavel Khomski <pkhomski at wiwi.uni-bielefeld.de>
> >>>>>     on Tue, 08 Feb 2005 10:20:03 +0100 writes:
> 
>    Pavel> this is a question, how can i specify the random part
>    Pavel> in the GLMM-call (of the lme4 library) for compound
>    Pavel> matrices just in the the same way as they defined in
>    Pavel> the lme-Call (of the nlme library).
> 
> ``twice in such a short paragraph -- yikes !!'' ... I'm getting
> convulsive...
> 
> There is NO lme4 library nor an nlme one !
> There's the lme4 *PACKAGE* and the nlme *PACKAGE* -- please --
> 
> (If the nlme package is built, it will rely on a nlme.so or
> nlme.dll (or nlme.dylib ...) *library* of compiled C code,
> and if packages are installed,
> they are installed into a library of packages;
> typically into one of the libraries in .libPaths()
> )
> 
> whooh.... Martin
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> 


-- 
best,
-tony

"Commit early,commit often, and commit in a repository from which we can easily
roll-back your mistakes" (AJR, 4Jan05).

A.J. Rossini
blindglobe at gmail.com