[Rd] documentation for rank() (PR#7298)

[Douglas Grove]

Oh crap.  So sorry.  This is my fault (obviously).
Prior to the new ties methods being added in 2.0.0
I modified the source to do this myself.  So looks
like I forgot: (1) that my modified code was still
being accessed default (thought I'd removed it) and
(2) that I had added in the 'decreasing' argument.

It did seem very odd to me when I saw the undocumented
argument.

Sorry for the this faulty bug report.

BTW, would someone please add a 'decreasing' argument to rank.
It seems natural to have one, just like sort, and only
involves about two lines of code and a few lines of
editing to the help file. 

Thanks,
Doug



On Wed, 21 Oct 2004, Peter Dalgaard wrote:

> dgrove at fhcrc.org writes:
> 
> > I just found that rank() has a 'decreasing' argument that is not documented in
> > its
> > help page.  I checked my version of 2.0.0 (original release hence unpatched)
> > and
> > it is not documented there.  For curiousity I also went back to version 1.8.1
> > and
> > checked the function (not the documentation)and at that point rank() had not
> > yet
> > acquired the 'decreasing' argument.
> > 
> > It's ironic as I was wishing that rank() had a decreasing option like
> > sort does, and then I found that it already does.
> 
> Eh????
> 
> I have
> 
> > rank
> function (x, na.last = TRUE, ties.method = c("average", "first",
>     "random", "max", "min"))
> {....
> 
> And we do have QC tools that work very hard to ensure that all
> arguments are documented!
> 
> -- 
>    O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
>   c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
>  (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
> ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk)             FAX: (+45) 35327907
>