[Rd] Roxygen
hadley wickham
h.wickham at gmail.com
Fri Mar 21 16:29:31 CET 2008
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
> On 21/03/2008 2:09 AM, Peter Danenberg wrote:
> >> No, we want a solution in R.
> >
> > Would it suffice, by the way, to source() a file and introspect upon
> > its objects with ls(), formals(), typeof(), mode(), and the like; or
> > should we formalize, say, a BNF and write the accompanying automaton?
>
> I don't know Manuel's intentions, but I'd say you should make use of the
> parse() function, not source. parse() converts source into unevaluated
> expressions. If you start writing your own parser of R code, it will be
> hard to validate, and hard to maintain, because there are occasional
> tweaks to the R definition.
>
> parse() currently does nothing with comments, but it does tell you where
> each parsed expression came from, so your code could use that
> information to look again through the source for the bits that interest you.
But you'll still need a formal grammar for the documentation comments.
Borrowing the basic style of javadoc should suffice, although there
are some tricky issues with line-endings etc.
Hadley
--
http://had.co.nz/
More information about the R-devel
mailing list