[R] [FORGED] Re: [FORGED] Re: identical() versus sapply()

[Rolf Turner]

On 12/04/16 14:45, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> On 11/04/2016 10:18 PM, Bert Gunter wrote:
>> "The documentation aims to be accurate, not necessarily clear."
>>
>> !!!
>>
>> I hope that is not the case! Accurate documentation that is confusing
>> is not very useful.
>
> I don't think it is ever intentionally confusing, but it is often
> concise to the point of obscurity.  Words are chosen carefully, and
> explanations are not repeated.  It takes an effort to read it.  It will
> be clear to careful readers, but not to all readers.
>
> I was thinking of the statement quoted earlier, 'as(x, "numeric") uses
> the existing as.numeric function'.  That is different than saying 'as(x,
> "numeric") is the same as as.numeric(x)'.


IMHO this is so *obviously* confusing and misleading --- even though it 
is technically correct --- that whoever wrote it was either 
intentionally trying to be confusing or is unbelievably obtuse and/or 
out of touch with reality.

It is not (again IMHO) clear even to *very* careful readers.

To my mind this documentation fails even the fortune(350) test.

cheers,

Rolf

-- 
Technical Editor ANZJS
Department of Statistics
University of Auckland
Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276