[R] Logical inconsistency

[Mark Difford]

And here one is very much inclined to chirp in and say, "A matchless Wacek
strikes again."

Regards, and thanks to all for a most entertaining (and enlightening)
thread.


Wacek Kusnierczyk wrote:
> 
> Patrick Connolly wrote:
>> On Mon, 08-Dec-2008 at 02:05AM +0800, Berwin A Turlach wrote:
>>
>> |> G'day Wacek,
>> |> 
>> |> On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:49:24 +0100
>> |> Wacek Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk at idi.ntnu.no> wrote:
>> |> 
>> |> [....]
>> |> > >> there is, in principle, no problem in having a high-level
>> language
>> |> > >> perform the computation in a logically consistent way.  
>> |> > >
>> |> > > Is this now supposed to be a "Radio Eriwan" joke?  As another
>> saying
>> |> > > goes: in theory there is no difference between theory and
>> practice,
>> |> > > in practice there is.
>> |> > 
>> |> > no joke, sorry to disappoint you. 
>> |> 
>> |> Apparently it is, you seem to be a comedian without knowing it. :)
>>
>> I think this guy's a riot!  Self-effacing humour is not easy to do,
>> but he's really good at it.  That wonderful phrase a bit further back
>> in this thread where he referred to his 'fiercely truculent' whining
>> is one deserving preservation.  
>>   
> 
> as an afterthought, patrick:  i have already promised to keep my tongue
> behind my teeth, but I'd like it to be a fair deal -- please try not to
> provoke.  ain't bovvered, but maybe you're getting unnecessarily
> personal, and it's really telling more about you than about me.  i'd
> suggest that you actually read the funny quote at the bottom of your own
> post (and kept in the foot of this post).
> 
>> It's a shame the brilliance is lost somewhat by the use a keyboard
>> that has no <Shift> key.  I've found a lot of these wonderful musings
>> too much effort to read.  I'm not familiar with exotic keyboard
>> layouts, but perhaps the Norwegian one uses <Shift> for something mere
>> non-Nordics wouldn't understand.  Pity that.
>>
>>   
> 
> oncE you'rE sO couRageous to strIke at tHis leveL, YOU mAy wish to
> con.ta.ct the developeRs of the r base package.  maybe we could avoid
> having to navigate between design features such as fun and FUN, NA and
> is.na, colMeans and colnames, Map and lapply, ifelse and tryCatch, and
> other sorts of typographical adhockery.  can you find brilliance in
> this?  is using these not too much effort for you?
> 
> vQ
> 
> 
> -- 
> ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.   
>    ___    Patrick Connolly   
>  {~._.~}          		 Great minds discuss ideas    
>  _( Y )_  	  	        Middle minds discuss events 
> (:_~*~_:) 	       		 Small minds discuss people  
>  (_)-(_)  	                           ..... Anon
> 	  
> ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Logical-inconsistency-tp20852777p20930372.html
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.