Message-ID: <8b356f880909031436j991fb05m4d9e7c1da646f5a0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: 2009-09-03T21:36:19Z
From: Stavros Macrakis
Subject: Documentation for is.atomic and is.recursive
In-Reply-To: <4A9EE3D8.7040008@stats.uwo.ca>
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