[R] R and ViM
jeff.horner at vanderbilt.edu
Fri Apr 21 18:41:36 CEST 2006
Bill West wrote:
> Yes, my r.vim ftplugin file is a windows only solution. It is not yet at
> the point, however, where it may be called a "solution". :) It currently
> only handles single lines of code. I posted it before only as a proof of
> concept. I should have been clearer in my earier post.
> For my Linux computer I have been successfully using the R.vim script by
> Johannes Ranke found in the vim scripts:
> This also uses Perl, but depends on IO::Pty, which (although I am no expert)
> I do not believe is available for Windows.
I've been following this thread with some interest as I use both R and
VIM, but I just want to point out that we have come full circle by *not*
answering the original thread creator's question:
"My question now is, whether there are already people out there knowing
how to do this in a similar easy way as with Emacs, and if those would
be willing to share this knowledge.
I did already research on the web on this topic, but i couldn't find
satisfying answers, except one good looking approach on the ViM-website
with a perl-script called funnel.pl, which I couldn't make running on
my mac OSX 10.3.9 so far."
So this last post suggests that the VIM script (id 1048) is useful
(which it is), but in fact the original thread creator already stated
that it doesn't work for his platform.
The real answer is: there's probably no current 'similar way as with
Emacs [and ESS]' to integrate R and VIM on mac OSX 10.3.9, but I bet you
might find a better answer on the R-SIG-Mac email list here:
So I hope this helps, Michael.
I point all this out to illuminate how hard it is to both "convey" a
message in email and also to "interpret" a message in email, to the
point that responses to questions on this list can really wander off on
tangents (which is not necessarily a bad thing; I had no clue the R.vim
script existed for Linux). I personally find benefit in reading both the
R-help and R-devel mailing lists, and I commend and am thankful for all
those email authors who "convey" their message in email with sincerity,
There was a recent Wired article here:
that cited a "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology" paper titled
"Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think?":
which essentially points out the fact that determining the tone of an
author's email is no better than chance, which I believe can lead to
misinterpretation of message and meaning, and especially when authors
use negative messages like "RTFM" (google it; you'll figure it out quickly).
Jeffrey Horner Computer Systems Analyst School of Medicine
615-322-8606 Department of Biostatistics Vanderbilt University
More information about the R-help