On 1/12/07, Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Byron Ellis wrote:
>
>
> X11 has two, and with an extension three, and all can be accessed via
> file().
OS X supports arbitrarily and even uniquely named pasteboards (for use
as an IPC mechanism). I suppose a URI-esqu
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Byron Ellis wrote:
> On 1/11/07, Martin Maechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Byron> Why is the clipboard accessed through file() and not,
>> Byron> say, a clipboard() connection? Is there a good reason
>> Byron> for this or is it simply historical?
>>
>> Why use
On 1/11/07, Martin Maechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Byron> Why is the clipboard accessed through file() and not,
> Byron> say, a clipboard() connection? Is there a good reason
> Byron> for this or is it simply historical?
>
> Why use a new function name for just one special case?
>
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Byron Ellis wrote:
> I have a stupid question. Why is the clipboard accessed through file()
> and not, say, a clipboard() connection? Is there a good reason for
> this or is it simply historical?
You can in most uses replace file("clipboard") by "clipboard".
In fact internal
> "Byron" == Byron Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:25:45 -0800 writes:
Byron> I have a stupid question.
not stupid.
Byron> Why is the clipboard accessed through file() and not,
Byron> say, a clipboard() connection? Is there a good reason
Byron> for
I have a stupid question. Why is the clipboard accessed through file()
and not, say, a clipboard() connection? Is there a good reason for
this or is it simply historical?
--
Byron Ellis ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"Oook" -- The Librarian
__
R-devel@r-project.o
