On Thu, 17 May 2007, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 5/17/2007 3:54 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>> There is a similar issue with argument partial matching. Since we have the >> source of R one can pretty easily build a version of R which does not have >> the feature: I have been doing that in conjunction with 'codetools' to do >> some checking. >> >> In both cases there is traditional partial matching: seq(along=) or >> seq(length=), and $fitted vs $fitted.values. There are not many uses of >> seq(along.with=) about and vastly more of seq(along=) (although in R using >> seq_along() is preferable): even in some packages which do use >> seq(along.with=) there are more instances of seq(along=). > > Opinions, please: > > In another thread I think we have agreement to add an extra arg to the > vignette() function to limit it to attached packages. By analogy with other > similar functions, the arg would be named all.available. However, I suspect > most users would abbreviate that to just "all". > > Should I name it "all.available" for consistency, or "all" in anticipation of > a day when exact argument matching will be required? I don't think it will be required. However, the use of all.names etc is historical, from the days when S (and R) would warn if you used the name of a local non-function as a function, do an arg 'all' got in the way. I would use the most intuitive form. Shortly R-devel will have options to warn on partial matching in $ and in args. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
