And of course let's not forget that a particularly twisted individual could overwrite "=":
> `=` <- function(x,y) print(x+y) > 3 = 4 [1] 7 > 3 <- 4 Error in 3 <- 4 : invalid (do_set) left-hand side to assignment I also was for a while mystified by the <- assignment, and preferred = instead, but have since grown out of it, and now find <- more clear (especially since it makes the separation between function arguments and assignments clear). I now have a problem whenever I switch to another programming language .... Haris Skiadas Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Hanover College On Jan 13, 2008, at 10:25 PM, S Ellison wrote: > .. and don't forget that 6 -> x works but 6 = x won't ... > >>>> "Gabor Grothendieck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/13/08 10:50 PM >>>> >>> > No. > >> f <- function(a = 3, b = 4) a-b >> f(b = 10) > [1] -7 >> f(b <- 10) > [1] 6 > > but if you only replace it in the context: > > x <- ... > > then it should be ok. > > On Jan 13, 2008 5:41 PM, Nasser Abbasi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> hi; >> >> When I first started looking at R code, I thought that the <- >> notation > for >> assignment made the code less readable (and I still do). Then I >> found > that >> now one can use "=" in place of "<-" for assignment (I understand >> this >> started since version 1.4). Anyway, I think using "=" makes the code > much >> more readable. >> >> I was wondering, would it be safe if I replace all the occurrences of > "<-" >> by "=" in any function of R? Or do you think this will break things? >> >> I like to look at a pretty code, and I just can't stand looking at > those >> "<-" any more :) >> >> I am using latest version of R on windoz platform. >> >> thanks >> Nasser >> ______________________________________________ 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.
