[Rd] RFC: adding an 'exact' argument to [[
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Fri May 18 11:54:56 CEST 2007
On Thu, 17 May 2007, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> On 5/17/2007 3:54 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>> There is a similar issue with argument partial matching. Since we have the
>> source of R one can pretty easily build a version of R which does not have
>> the feature: I have been doing that in conjunction with 'codetools' to do
>> some checking.
>> In both cases there is traditional partial matching: seq(along=) or
>> seq(length=), and $fitted vs $fitted.values. There are not many uses of
>> seq(along.with=) about and vastly more of seq(along=) (although in R using
>> seq_along() is preferable): even in some packages which do use
>> seq(along.with=) there are more instances of seq(along=).
> Opinions, please:
> In another thread I think we have agreement to add an extra arg to the
> vignette() function to limit it to attached packages. By analogy with other
> similar functions, the arg would be named all.available. However, I suspect
> most users would abbreviate that to just "all".
> Should I name it "all.available" for consistency, or "all" in anticipation of
> a day when exact argument matching will be required?
I don't think it will be required.
However, the use of all.names etc is historical, from the days when S (and
R) would warn if you used the name of a local non-function as a function,
do an arg 'all' got in the way. I would use the most intuitive form.
Shortly R-devel will have options to warn on partial matching in $ and in
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
More information about the R-devel