>>>>> David Hugh-Jones >>>>> on Sat, 15 Dec 2018 08:47:28 +0100 writes:
> I would argue examples should encourage good > practice. Beginners ought to learn to keep data in data > frames and not to overuse attach(). Note there's no attach() there in any of these examples! > otherwise at their own risk, but they have less need of > explicit examples. The glm examples are nice in sofar they show both uses. I agree the lm() example(s) are "didactically misleading" by not using data frames at all. I disagree that only data frame examples should be shown. If lm() is one of the first R functions a beginneR must use -- because they are in a basic stats class, say -- it may be *better* didactically to focus on lm() in the very first example, and use data frames in a next one ... .... and instead of next one, we have the pretty clear comment ### less simple examples in "See Also" above I'm not convinced (but you can try more) we should change those examples or add more there. Martin > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 14:51, S Ellison > <s.elli...@lgcgroup.com> wrote: >> FWIW, before all the examples are changed to data frame >> variants, I think there's fairly good reason to have at >> least _one_ example that does _not_ place variables in a >> data frame. >> >> The data argument in lm() is optional. And there is more >> than one way to manage data in a project. I personally >> don't much like lots of stray variables lurking about, >> but if those are the only variables out there and we can >> be sure they aren't affected by other code, it's hardly >> essential to create a data frame to hold something you >> already have. Also, attach() is still part of R, for >> those folk who have a data frame but want to reference >> the contents across a wider range of functions without >> using with() a lot. lm() can reasonably omit the data >> argument there, too. >> >> So while there are good reasons to use data frames, there >> are also good reasons to provide examples that don't. >> >> Steve Ellison >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- > From: R-devel >> [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Ben > >> Bolker > Sent: 13 December 2018 20:36 > To: >> r-devel@r-project.org > Subject: Re: [Rd] Documentation >> examples for lm and glm >> > >> > >> > Agree. Or just create the data frame with those >> variables in it > directly ... >> > >> > On 2018-12-13 3:26 p.m., Thomas Yee wrote: > > Hello, >> > > >> > > something that has been on my mind for a decade or >> two has > > been the examples for lm() and glm(). They >> encourage poor style > > because of mismanagement of data >> frames. Also, having the > > variables in a data frame >> means that predict() > > is more likely to work properly. >> > > >> > > For lm(), the variables should be put into a data >> frame. > > As 2 vectors are assigned first in the >> general workspace they > > should be deleted afterwards. >> > > >> > > For the glm(), the data frame d.AD is constructed but >> not used. Also, > > its 3 components were assigned first >> in the general workspace, so they > > float around >> dangerously afterwards like in the lm() example. >> > > >> > > Rather than attached improved .Rd files here, they >> are put at > > www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~yee/Rdfiles > > >> You are welcome to use them! >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > >> > > Thomas >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________ > > >> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >> > >> > ______________________________________________ > >> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >> >> >> ******************************************************************* >> This email and any attachments are confidential. Any >> u...{{dropped:12}} > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel