Antony Unwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 12:43:07PM CET]: > There have been several constructive responses to John Sorkin's > comment, but none of them are fully satisfactory. Of course, if you > know the name of the function you are looking for, there are lots of > ways to search ? provided that everyone calls the function by a name > that matches your search.
I follow the suggestion to Google (mostly restricted by site:cran.r-project.org) which gets me quite far. > If you think there might be a function, > but you don't know the name, then you have to be lucky in how you > search. R is a language and the suggestions so far seem to me like > dictionary suggestions, whereas maybe what John is looking for is > something more like a thesarus. This is hard to do in a collaborative effort. One analogue is the HOWTOs vs the man pages which I see in Linux. Some of the HOWTOs are outstanding, the only problem they are facing is that they tend to be out of date. > > R packages are a strange collection, as befits a growing language. > There are large packages, small packages, good packages (and not so > good packages), personal mixtures of tools in packages, packages to > accompany books, superceded packages, unusual packages, everything. > Above all there are lots of packages. As the software editor of the > Journal of Statistical Software I suggested we should review R > packages. You mean: prior to submission? > No one has shown any enthusiasm for this suggestion, but I > think it would help. Any volunteers? I am still putting some hope into the R Wiki. To my dismay it is also package oriented, not method-oriented. I tend to think that there is a chance of controlled documentation if somebody set out an infrastructure going beyond the current one. Anything like a classification of methods. Thing is, I may like to volunteer, but not in the "here's a package for you to review by week 32" way. Rather in the way that I search a package which fits my problem. One package lets me down and I'd like to know other users and the maintainer about it. The other one works black magic and I'd like to drop a raving review about it. This needs an infrastructure with a low barrier to entry. A wiki is not the worst idea if the initial infrastructure is geared at addressing problems rather than packages. -- Johannes H�sing There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] from such a trifling investment of fact. http://derwisch.wikidot.com (Mark Twain, "Life on the Mississippi")
______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.