Skip to content

glm code bug (PR#224)

1 message · 320098218774-0001@t-online.de

#
ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk schrieb:
My opinion as a simple user ... reimplement glm is a very good idea!. Just
for the "cosmetic" point of view: please, take out all of these silly *`s 
indicating significant levels in the output. Also, if somebody needs the "null 
deviance" make it as optional, and not in the stardard output.

Best regards,
Pablo.



-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
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
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._