Closes #1521, fixes typo in between.Rd

[MichaelChirico]

Basically identical to #1515; with perfect foresight these would have been the same PR.

[arunsrinivasan]

Could you please make changes specific to the issue you highlight? There's no ambiguity in the documentation as far as I can tell. Also what's orderable? The spacing in the code section is also on purpose. Matt doesn't like spaces between argument and value.

[MichaelChirico]

@arunsrinivasan orderable means <= etc. are valid.

See 3 + 2i < 1 + 3i -- complex types are not orderable. More commonly, factor(1) < factor(2) is also outside the scope of between. I'll revert the spacing.

I switched to x %between% y to match the declaration of arguments in between.R. I understood that R CMD throws errors/warnings if there are undocumented arguments, which y currently is.

I've also added a quick sentence in Notes to point out the default value of incbounds in the infix usage.

[arunsrinivasan]

I find that definition of orderable confusing. Where do you draw this definition from? The word doesn't exist in the dictionary. My first thought was if the vector can be ordered, i.e., if order(x) is valid..

Everything else makes sense. I'd suggest then to change to title of PR to "Improvements to between.Rd". This isn't just a typo fix, but quite a lot of nice improvements. Also you can split the news item (if you wish).

[MichaelChirico]

@arunsrinivasan then you're using a poor dictionary ;-) OED definition 3 strikes quite close to what I have in mind ("That may be arranged in a series." in case it's paywalled).

But your confusion is still valid -- I'll add a few words to make it more clear what we have in mind as valid x.

Revision coming up tonight/tomorrow...

[arunsrinivasan]

Hm, I see it here now. Note to self: don't rely on my mac's inbuilt dictionary.

Sure, no hurry. Take your time. Thanks!

[MichaelChirico]

@arunsrinivasan should be all set

[arunsrinivasan]

Looks great!