Is the reason you want a block comment containing code (as opposed to
arbitrary text) that you want to be able to easily run the commented out
code? If so the 'if()' construct has the advantage that you only need to
change code at the start of the comment, not at both ends.
The if(FALSE) could
I agree, since one reason for block commenting is to include
syntactically-invalid information (such as broken code) in the source code.
However, block commenting is not wholly a good thing, as both the R parser and
human coders often find it challenging to identify where the end of the block
Uwe showed an R code -ish way to do it. RStudio and probably other R UI's
and IDE's -- which is the way most folks write code, I think -- also make
it easy to do.
Cheers,
Bert
Bert Gunter
"The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and
sticking things into it."
--
AFAIK block comment is not possible
it needs to be implemented in R interpreter and defined in the
parser.'If' solution is not elegant.
On 2 September 2017 at 14:09, Uwe Ligges
wrote:
>
>
> On 02.09.2017 11:40, Christian wrote:
>>
>> I consider it quite worth
On 02.09.2017 11:40, Christian wrote:
I consider it quite worth while to introduce into R syntax a nestable
block comment like
#{
}#
if(FALSE){
}
Best,
Uwe Ligges
It would make documentation more easily manageable and lucid.
Is there considerable need for this.
Please, comment on
I consider it quite worth while to introduce into R syntax a nestable
block comment like
#{
}#
It would make documentation more easily manageable and lucid.
Is there considerable need for this.
Please, comment on this.
How about R core?
Christian
--
Christian Hoffmann
Rigiblickstrasse 15b
6 matches
Mail list logo