On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Hadley Wickham <h.wick...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Radford Neal <radf...@cs.toronto.edu> wrote: >> Michael Lawrence (as last in long series of posters)... >> >>> Yes, it would bind the language object to the environment, like an >>> R-level promise (but "promise" of course refers specifically to just >>> _lazy_ evaluation). >>> >>> For the uqs() thing, expanding calls like that is somewhat orthogonal >>> to NSE. It would be nice in general to be able to write something like >>> mean(x, extra_args...) without resorting to do.call(mean, c(list(x), >>> extra_args)). If we had that then uqs() would just be the combination >>> of unquote and expansion, i.e., mean(x, @extra_args...). The "..." >>> postfix would not work since it's still a valid symbol name, but we >>> could come up with something. >> >> >> I've been trying to follow this proposal, though without tracking down >> all the tweets, etc. that are referenced. I suspect I'm not the only >> reader who isn't clear exactly what is being proposed. I think a >> detailed, self-contained proposal would be useful. > > We have a working implementation (which I'm calling tidyeval) in > https://github.com/hadley/rlang, but we have yet to write it up. We'll > spend some time documenting since it seems to be of broader interest.
First pass at programming dplyr vignette (including details about tidyeval) at http://rpubs.com/hadley/dplyr-programming Hadley -- http://hadley.nz ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel