I don't have time to look at your new version, however, I *did* look at the last one and tried to replace
However, your version wasn't good enough to "work" for 'make tests'
[[ even after fixing the default tolerance which should be
changed from
.Machine$double.eps
to sqrt(.Machine$double.eps)
Martin The version I just posted is the same as the last one (called cut three). I'm not sure what 'make tests' is suppose to do. I just ran it and it gave me a bunch of error messages. It also looks like it may have changed some things to mess up my working copy of R, but I'm not sure. If you can be more specific about how this all.equal is not good enough for 'make tests' then I will try to fix it. I'm not sure what the general wisdom is and I realize that .Machine$double.eps is a fairly tight comparison, but I routinely test things to tighter tolerances than sqrt(.Machine$double.eps). The change in C libraries between Splus 3.1 and 3.2 made large cumulative differences in some of my simulations and I never would have found the problem if I had only been checking calculations to sqrt(.Machine$double.eps). Paul -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- 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 _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._