From ggrothendieck at gmail.com  Sun Mar  9 23:47:29 2008
From: ggrothendieck at gmail.com (Gabor Grothendieck)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:47:29 -0400
Subject: [Rd] [patch] add=TRUE in plot.default()
In-Reply-To: <f8e6ff050803091527j1e09dbe6qf298ef9e131e27ba@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080309031119.GC23544@econ.upenn.edu>
	<47D40C41.1000202@stats.uwo.ca>
	<20080309164639.GF23544@econ.upenn.edu> <47D442B8.10501@stats.uwo.ca>
	<20080309215833.GH23544@econ.upenn.edu>
	<f8e6ff050803091527j1e09dbe6qf298ef9e131e27ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <971536df0803091547m526c144s47647f10f725def4@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 6:27 PM, hadley wickham <h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  Yes.  The ability to plot things on top of each other is important.
> >  The simplicity created by having a single interface for adding to plots
> >  outweighs the complexity of yet another parameter.
> >
> >  The add parameter only interacts with other parameters superficially --
> >  some parameters of "plot" (like log) are related to the shape of the axes,
> >  and should be inherited from what is on the plot already.
>
> But what about when the new data is outside the range of the current
> plot?

plot/lines/points already works that way so this is just an interface issue.



[Rd] [patch] add=TRUE in plot.default()
Gabor Grothendieck