From macrakis at alum.mit.edu  Thu Sep  3 23:36:19 2009
From: macrakis at alum.mit.edu (Stavros Macrakis)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 17:36:19 -0400
Subject: [Rd] Documentation for is.atomic and is.recursive
In-Reply-To: <4A9EE3D8.7040008@stats.uwo.ca>
References: <8b356f880909021139pa07d922q1f1c28a0fb70cdbe@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A9EC967.3080507@stats.uwo.ca>
	<8b356f880909021310l3805de62g2c2467db9a1591d2@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A9EE3D8.7040008@stats.uwo.ca>
Message-ID: <8b356f880909031436j991fb05m4d9e7c1da646f5a0@mail.gmail.com>

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



[Rd] Documentation for is.atomic and is.recursive
Stavros Macrakis