[Rd] Patch proposal for R style consistency (concerning deparse.c)

Brian Lee Yung Rowe rowe at muxspace.com
Thu May 2 17:59:35 CEST 2013

Writing R in a declarative style a la functional programming makes this whole thread go away since you don't need if/else blocks. 

Brian Lee Yung Rowe

On May 2, 2013, at 8:27 AM, Terry Therneau <therneau at mayo.edu> wrote:

> I'll be the "anybody" to argue that
>     }  else {
> is an ugly kludge which you will never find in my source code.  Yes, it's necessary at the command line because the parser needs help in guessing when an expression is finished, but is only needed in that case.  Since I can hardly imagine using else at the command line (that many correct characters in a row exceeds my typing skill) it's not an issue for me.  I most certainly would not inflict this construction on my pupils when teaching a class, nor that any break of a long line has to be after "+" but not before, nor other crutches for the parser's sake.  Let them know about the special case of course, but don't sacrifice good coding style the deficiency.
> That said, I am completely ambivalent to the result of deparse.  Just throwing up an objection to the "purity" argument: things were beginning to sound a bit too bombastic :-).
> Terry T.
> On 05/02/2013 05:00 AM, r-devel-request at r-project.org wrote:
>>  I want "} else {".  Yihue wants "} else {".  And I have not heard anybody
>> say they prefer the other way, unless you interpret Duncan's comment
>> "that's nonsense" as a blanket defense of the status quo. But I don't think
>> he meant that.  This is a matter of style consistency and avoidance of new
>> R-user confusion and error.
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

More information about the R-devel mailing list