Documentation for is.atomic and is.recursive
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