From peter.meilstrup at gmail.com  Sat Feb  9 10:29:43 2013
From: peter.meilstrup at gmail.com (Peter Meilstrup)
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 01:29:43 -0800
Subject: [Rd] Arguments passing through dot-dot-dot lose ability to
	check for missing()?
In-Reply-To: <CAJoaRhZe9qCgoLKhZSOQm4HLp1h_BNr-VFq+C4rO1X3smRLcOQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJoaRhZe9qCgoLKhZSOQm4HLp1h_BNr-VFq+C4rO1X3smRLcOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJoaRhb-N5Gh3ZtfDMn5bZHwPVYMhyXxTCiSa3SiwtYv+UXS_Q@mail.gmail.com>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/attachments/20130209/7515cafd/attachment.pl>


[Rd] Arguments passing through dot-dot-dot lose ability to check for missing()?
Peter Meilstrup