Underscores in package names
On 2019-08-09 14:27, neonira Arinoem wrote:
I do not follow you Gabriel. Package name must not use digit numbers. Tarbal will use them, taken from the DESCRIPTION file, version field. That's why I consider the weird case name you presented as irrelevant, and not to be considered.
ggplot2 ? Numbers are allowed in package names right now.
Le ven. 9 ao?t 2019 ? 20:41, Gabriel Becker <gabembecker at gmail.com> a ?crit :
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 11:05 AM neonira Arinoem <neonira at gmail.com> wrote:
Won't it be better to have a convention that allows lowercase, dash, underscore and dot as only valid characters for new package names and keep the ancient format validation scheme for older package names?
Validation isn't the only thing we need to do wrt package names. we also need to detect them, and particularly, in at least one case, extract them from package tarball filenames (which we also need to be able to detect/find). If we were writing a new language and people wanted to allow snake case in package names, sure, but we're talking about about changing how a small but package names and package tarballs have always (or at least a very long time, I didn't check) had the same form, and it seems expressive enough to me? I mean periods are allowed if you feel a strong need for something other than a letter. Note that this proposal would make mypackage_2.3.1 a valid *package name*, whose corresponding tarball name might be mypackage_2.3.1_2.3.2 after a patch. Yes its a silly example, but why allow that kind of ambiguity? For the record @Ben Bolker <bbolker at gmail.com> Packages that mix case anywhere in their package name:
table(grepl("((^[a-z].*[A-Z])|(^[A-Z].*[a-z]))", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 8818 5932 Packages which start with lower case and have at least one upper
table(grepl("((^[a-z].*[A-Z]))", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 12315 2435 Packages which start with uppercase and have at least one lower
table(grepl("((^[A-Z].*[a-z]))", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 11253 3497 Packages which take advantage of the above-mentioned legality of periods
table(grepl(".", row.names(a1), fixed=TRUE))
FALSE TRUE 14259 491 Packages with pure lower-case alphabetic names
table(grepl("^[a-z]+$", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 7712 7038 Packages with pure upper-case alphabetic names
table(grepl("^[A-Z]+$", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 13636 1114 Package with at least one numeric digit in their name
table(grepl("[0-9]", row.names(a1)))
FALSE TRUE 14208 542 It would be interesting to do an actual analysis of the changes in these trends over time, but I Really should be working, so that will have to either wait or be done by someone else. Best, ~G
This could be implemented by a single function, taking a strictNaming_b_1 parameter which defaults to true. Easy to use, and compliance results will vary according to the parameter value, allowing strict compliance for new package names and lazy compliance for older ones. Doing so allows to enforce a new package name convention while also insuring continuity of compliance for already existing package names. Fabien GELINEAU alias Neonira Le ven. 9 ao?t 2019 ? 18:40, Kevin Wright <kw.stat at gmail.com> a ?crit :
Please, no. I'd also like to disallow uppercase letters in package
names.
For instance, the cuteness of using a capital "R" in package names is outweighed by the annoyance of trying to remember which packages use an upper-case letter. On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 9:32 AM Jim Hester <james.f.hester at gmail.com> wrote:
Are there technical reasons that package names cannot be snake case? This seems to be enforced by `.standard_regexps()$valid_package_name` which currently returns "[[:alpha:]][[:alnum:].]*[[:alnum:]]" Is there any technical reason this couldn't be altered to accept `_` as well, e.g. "[[:alpha:]][[:alnum:]._]*[[:alnum:]]" I realize that historically `_` has not always been valid in variable names, but this has now been acceptable for 15+ years (since R 1.9.0 I believe). Might we also allow underscores for package names? Jim
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
--
Kevin Wright
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Brian G. Peterson http://braverock.com/brian/ Ph: 773-459-4973 IM: bgpbraverock