pretty not covering the range properly (PR#673)
maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch writes:
Ok, I've fixed pretty() for the development version
such that
p <- pretty(x)
all(p[1] <= x & x <= p[2])
should be guaranteed (again).
Gulp. I'm pretty(!) sure there was a reason for changing it in the other direction... [I have a vague recollection of pretty(pretty(x)) != pretty(x) or something like that] Are we quite sure that it is not the caller that needs to be a little more lenient in the bounds checking? OTOH, it's in code you wrote yourself...
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3 c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._