It was not my intention to start any kind of war.
I do want to thank Katharine Mullen for sharing to link to the review in R
News. It helps me understand why there might be some controversy over my
positive experience with The R Book.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm working my through th
On 11/30/07, Uwe Ligges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Tom La Bone wrote:
> > IMHO "The R Book" is far better than indicated in that review and should be
> > near the top of the list for beginners looking for a "manual" for R.
>
> We can start a big war about that book now, but we should discuss
Tom La Bone wrote:
> IMHO "The R Book" is far better than indicated in that review and should be
> near the top of the list for beginners looking for a "manual" for R.
We can start a big war about that book now, but we should discuss useful
things instead. I am currently reviewing this book for
IMHO "The R Book" is far better than indicated in that review and should be
near the top of the list for beginners looking for a "manual" for R.
Tom
Katharine Mullen wrote:
>
> It was reviewed in the most recent R News
> (http://www.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2007-2.pdf).
>
> On Thu, 29 No
It was reviewed in the most recent R News
(http://www.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2007-2.pdf).
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Robert Harris wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've recently discovered "The R Book" by Micheal J. Crawley. I am new to R
> and I am finding it incredibly useful.
>
> With my background in m
Hi all,
I've recently discovered "The R Book" by Micheal J. Crawley. I am new to R and
I am finding it incredibly useful.
With my background in math and programming, I expected that I would be able to
pick it up quickly, but even after reading several other intro books, I found
it was still ha
6 matches
Mail list logo
