simon.urbanek at r-project.org
Wed Jul 5 01:43:58 CEST 2006
On Jul 4, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>> I agree - it would be even nicer if there was a way to enable --
>> no- save with some environment variable ...
> Environment variables in Windows are a mess. Doing things on the
> command line or through option() is a lot easier.
Although I disagree (about the mess), I was thinking mainly about
unix here - I'd simply love to put something in my .profile that will
prevent the annoying question ;).
>> However, I think Duncan's approach is a very bad idea, because it
>> means that with the same answer will give you opposite result.
>> This is a big UI no-no. (Windows users may may think it's a valid
>> option, because Microsoft tends to do stupid things like that,
>> but that's only because they never think about UI).
> I agree that that is a problem. However, I don't know a better
> - I want to make it hard for the user to accidentally create a
> saved workspace. Just changing the default will mean that people
> who habitually answer "yes" will still get the wrong result.
I would argue that if someone 'habitually' ignores the default and
selects yes, then it's his/her deliberate choice and likely not a new
user, because a new user doesn't yet have such a habit - to the
contrary, new users are the one most likely influenced by defaults.
> - I want to make it hard for the user to accidentally lose a
> workspace. Hence --no-save is not an option.
> The problem with my solution as it stands is that people who
> habitually answer "yes" will sometimes accidentally lose a workspace.
.. and for the reason you stated I think that's a major problem!
>> The correct approach is to change the default button, but
>> definitely not the dialog box.
> I don't think this is sufficient.
Your solution may possibly be more efficient in solving the problem
you described, but IMHO it causes a much bigger problem. I'd still
prefer one save too many that any loss of data.
More information about the R-devel