Duncan Murdoch wrote: > I haven't done it, but I suspect we could introduce special behaviour > for ??foo very easily. We could even have a whole hierarchy: > > ?foo, ??foo, ???foo, ????foo, ... > > Heh, that's rather nice, actually. In words, that could read
?foo: tell me about foo! ??foo: what can you tell me about foo? ???foo: what can you tell me about things like foo? ????foo: I don't know what I'm looking for but it might be something related foo? You do have to be careful about messing with ?, though. I think many people, including me, would pretty quickly go nuts if ?par suddenly didn't work the way we're used to. -- O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Øster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
