readRDS and saveRDS
As load involves a side-effect, I would think that loadRDS is a bad idea. That said, read/write is far more consistent across all languages and internally with R than read/save is. My (worthless) vote is for writeRDS. Jeff
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Hadley Wickham <hadley at rice.edu> wrote:
Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become read.rds and write.rds? ?That would make them more consistent with the other reading and writing functions.
Ending names in .foo is a bad idea because of the S3 naming conventions, so I think this is unlikely. ?But you can always create an alias yourself...
It just makes teaching that much harder. ?We have the pairs: * read.csv and write.csv * load and save * readRDS and saveRDS Even loadRDS/saveRDS or readRDS/writeRDS would be better than the current combo. Hadley -- Assistant Professor / Dobelman Family Junior Chair Department of Statistics / Rice University http://had.co.nz/
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Jeffrey Ryan jeffrey.ryan at lemnica.com www.lemnica.com www.esotericR.com