[RkWard-devel] Length and NAs

[Stefan Roediger]

Am Montag, 26. März 2007 00:42 schrieb Thomas Friedrichsmeier:
> Hi,
>
> On Sunday 25 March 2007 22:02, Stefan Roediger wrote:
> > I tend to say that following plug-ins are stable (in term of functional,
> > feature complete, first reviewed):
> > * stem-and-leaf plot
>
> ok, this one is simple enough. Moved to plots.pluginmap.

Fine. I was thinking about to add an feature in the after the coming release 
which allows to use transformed vallues (e.g. "stem(log10(var))"). But maybe 
its better to create a plugin which transforms data in a certain way or does 
other operations like summation of some variables to a new one.

>
> > * moment tests
>
> I adjusted length/NA printing for those, and two of them still needed to be
> adjusted to local(). I think those are pretty much ready, but please take
> another look, if I've done everything correctly. I'll move them out of
> under_development around Tuesday, unless problems turn up.

I allready checked them briefly and so far no issues.

>
> > * outlier tests
>
> Adjusted length/NA printing. Also I modified the logic somewhat on when
> na.omit is called. I think the generated code is simpler, now. I think one
> question we should consider for a while, is whether we really want to
> include all the descriptives (mean, variance, etc.). I can see, why you did
> so, but perhaps it's better to just refer to the descriptive statistics
> plugin, instead?

Actually, I really would like to keep it that way because the outlier tests 
are tricky to interpretate sometimes (similar applies to moments). Using the 
descriptive means to run antother test for a rather simple information which 
needs more scrolling and stuff like that (btw, its even more convenient to 
use it that way later on in spread sheet). IMHO, it's the fastest way to find 
out what the data look like.
I guess these plug-ins won't be extended in future and thus it should be quite 
good maintainable even with this additional "tests". However, you are the 
boos.

>
> Also, I have not really looked at these in detail, yet.

okay

>
> > So far I did not put any work in the others but plan so for the coming
> > week. However, for the others in "TEST" and "Variances" I can say that
> > they work but do not use all of the latest development (e.g. local- and
> > NA-issues).
>
> Are those feature complete?

Yes, in my opinion they are.

>
> Regards
> Thomas