[Rcpp-commits] r3685 - pkg/RcppEigen/vignettes

[noreply at r-forge.r-project.org]

Author: dmbates
Date: 2012-07-10 20:26:14 +0200 (Tue, 10 Jul 2012)
New Revision: 3685

Modified:
   pkg/RcppEigen/vignettes/response-to-referees.tex
Log:
Update responses to referee.


Modified: pkg/RcppEigen/vignettes/response-to-referees.tex
===================================================================
--- pkg/RcppEigen/vignettes/response-to-referees.tex	2012-07-08 16:42:33 UTC (rev 3684)
+++ pkg/RcppEigen/vignettes/response-to-referees.tex	2012-07-10 18:26:14 UTC (rev 3685)
@@ -244,16 +244,9 @@
   Figures 4 and 5, and what are the part of text. 
 }
 \reply{
-  TODO/DB: I'm not sure how to address that.  I suppose that once any
-  changes are incorporated we can look at the placement of figures
-  and fiddle a bit if necessary.
-  \newline
-  DE: Agreed.  Latex floats can be tedious, but they can be tamed.  He does
-  have point, though, inasmuch as figures 4 and 5 really flow into each
-  other, and have no visual separator. For the infamous book draft, I gave up
-  on what I had suggested to you here and just went with (the latex package)
-  listings.   [Follow-up 9 May] I just added a set of horizontal rules to each
-  of the floats.  Take a look and see if you think that that makes it better.
+  We added horizontal rules delineating the code in the figures and
+  allowed ``here'' placement to bring each figure closer to its
+  initial reference.
 }
 
 
@@ -271,13 +264,7 @@
 \reply{
   But the SVD and eigendecomposition methods are set up to handle
   the rank-deficient cases with the Dplus function.  That is the
-  reason for introducing the rank-deficient case. 
-  %
-  TODO/DB: Although perhaps
-  we should look carefully again at the organization of that section.
-  %
-  DE: Tricky, very tricky.  I like what we have. I don't have a good argument
-  here.
+  reason for introducing the rank-deficient case where it is.
 }
 
 \pointRaised{Comment 3}{