[Rd] A "safe" do.call

[hadley wickham]

> > Or is this a bug in glm?  It certainly seems that the documentation
> > should mention that ... is passed to glm.control, which only takes
> > three arguments.  I realise that this doesn't come up very often
> > during an interactive model fitting session, and it is easy to remedy
> > when it does, but it makes writing robust functions hard when a
> > function with ... does in fact have a fixed argument list.
>
> I think the docmentation has conflated '...' for glm and '...' for
> weights.
>
> My recollection is that this was intentional: at least one core developer
> used to dislike '...' as it allowed mistyped argument names to be ignored.
> And he has a good point, IMO.

That seems a perfectly good reason not to use ... - but if you are
going to use ... it seems like you shouldn't warn on mismatched
argument names.  Maybe I can attack the problem in the opposite
direction - instead of matching the parameters of the function I'm
calling, I'll try and remove the parameters that probably belong to
ggplot.

Hadley

-- 
http://had.co.nz/