Peter Dalgaard BSA
21 Mar 1998 10:00:22 +0100
Ross Ihaka <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Speaking of names. I've been thinking whether it would not at some
> > point be wise to introduce namespaces into R. This would pretty
> > obviously break a lot of S code, but it would also make it possible to
> > avoid a lot of silly problems such as naming one's variables c, t, pt,
> > df, rm, ...
> > A plan that might work relatively smoothly could involve:
> > - Separate functions from variables. We already do that to some extent
> > ("looking for object of mode function...") [At the same time, one
> > design, functions are just objects, etc., but really: Wouldn't it be
> > nicer to type view(ls) the few times you actually wanted to see its
> > contents?]
> This has been done in common lisp and it's ugly. Consider
> apply(x, 1, mean)
> How do we indicate that this is the function called mean rather
> than the non-function mean? The single namespace makes it much
> easier to think about functions as data.
Ugh. You're right. An even clearer bit of ugliness is
mean<-mean(x) # you'll be surprised at how many people will do that!
as.list(mean) # which one??
Hmm. Plan B:
if you catch my drift?
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3
c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N
(*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (email@example.com) FAX: (+45) 35327907
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: firstname.lastname@example.org