[R] New mask.ok option for libraries

[Duncan Murdoch]

On 07/01/2021 10:02 a.m., Magnus Torfason wrote:
> I had sent the following to r-devel a while ago, but perhaps r-help is more
> appropriate.

No, this is definitely an R-devel topic.  You didn't get any replies 
there, but that doesn't mean you should post it again in the wrong place.

Duncan Murdoch

  I guess my question is what to do with this, would people
> generally file an issue, or is there a way to hear if this is something
> that makes sense to add – whether more info would be helpful and so on?
> 
> =====
> I was very happy to see the new mask.ok option. It works very well when
> conflicts.policy is "strict":
> 
> ---
> options(conflicts.policy="strict")
> library(igraph, exclude="decompose", mask.ok=c("spectrum","union"))
> #> [No messages]
> ---
> 
> However, if no conflicts.policy has been set, the masked objects are loudly
> reported, even if they are specified with mask.ok:
> 
> ---
> library(igraph, exclude="decompose", mask.ok=c("spectrum","union"))
> #>
> #> Attaching package: 'igraph'
> #> The following object is masked from 'package:stats':
> #>
> #>     spectrum
> #> The following object is masked from 'package:base':
> #>
> #>     union
> ---
> 
> It seems that if I specify mask.ok, that particular masking is expected and
> should NOT be reported, regardless of what the conflicts.policy is. It
> would be very useful for many users who are not ready to switch over to a
> strict conflicts.policy, to nevertheless be able to suppress messages about
> expected conflicts using mask.ok and thus only get messages when unexpected
> masking occurs.
> =====
> 
> Best,
> Magnus
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-help using r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>