[Rd] RFC: What should ?foo do?
murdoch at stats.uwo.ca
Sat Apr 26 23:21:06 CEST 2008
On 25/04/2008 2:47 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, Deepayan Sarkar wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I use ?foo mostly to look up usage of functions
>> that I know I want to use, and find it perfect for that (one benefit
>> over help() is that completion works for ?). The only thing I miss is
>> the ability to do the equivalent of help("foo", package = "bar");
>> ?bar::foo gives the help page for "::". Perhaps that would be
>> something to consider for addition.
> That fits most naturally with the (somewhat technical) idea that bar::foo
> becomes a symbol and not a function call. I believe that several of think
> that is in principle a better idea, but no one has as yet (AFAIK) explored
> the ramifications.
> However, 5 mins looking at the sources suggests that it is easy to do.
And you already did. Thanks!
I'm going to make the following change soon (in R-devel).
will now be like help.search("foo"). This will work with your change,
so ??utils::foo will limit the search to the utils package. This is
also quite easy. A more difficult thing I'd like to do is to broaden
the search to look outside the man pages, but that's a lot harder, and I
haven't started on it.
I will also follow Hadley's suggestion and change the format of the
help.search results, so you can just cut and paste after a question mark
to look up the particular topic, e.g. ??foo gives
utils::citEntry Writing Package CITATION Files
Type '?PKG::FOO' to inspect entry 'PKG::FOO TITLE'.
I haven't touched the case of ?foo failing; I'll want to try it for a
while to decide whether I like it best as is:
No documentation for 'foo' in specified packages and libraries:
you could try '??foo'
or whether it should just automatically call help.search, or something
More information about the R-devel