[Rd] symbols: xlim and ylim cannot be specified (PR#639)
Martin Maechler
Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch>
Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:48:17 +0200 (CEST)
[now I'm not CC'ing R-bugs, since this is not about the bug anymore..]
>>>>> "BDR" == Prof Brian D Ripley <ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk> writes:
BDR> On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch wrote:
.............
>> yes,
>> and Uwe's fix cures this problem.
>> and I have committed it for the release patches (!! i.e. "1.1.1 patched")
which has
ylab = "", xlim = NULL, ylim = NULL, ...)
and later
if(is.null(xlim)) {
...
}
BDR> Why is using NULL preferable here? The standard paradigm as I
BDR> understand it is
BDR> ylab = "", xlim, ylim, ...)
BDR> ...
BDR> if(missing(xlim)) {
BDR> xlim <- range(x, na.rm = TRUE)
BDR> xlim <- xlim + c(-1, 1) * (0.1 * diff(xlim))
BDR> }
BDR> In S there is a problem with passing down missingness, but not in R.
I know. Note however that to be really useful one would have to able to
also *set* missingness for an argument (which I think we can't currently)
I might want to call
symbols(.very.long.argument.list.etc.etc.,
xlim = if(<something>) my.xlim else <<DEFAULT>>,
...)
where with the NULL setup, I can even drop the else clause
{since if(FALSE) evaluates to NULL},
but with the missing(xlim) paradigm, I should be able to set <<DEFAULT>>
to missing...
In short, we (Uwe, people here and me) *do* prefer NULL to missing...
Martin
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._