truncate

BDR>But please do bear in mind that the names of standard C-level
BDR>functions are likely to be used for the same purpose in R.

I understand that this is convenient but I don't know why it should be
true. Wouldn't a convention like "C.truncate" make more sense?  Do you
expect R users to know the names of standard C function so they can
avoid them?  I doubt that most do. Do fortran or perl have the same
privilege?

BDR>Little-used packages (and there are over 100 packages
BDR>by now) cannot be given veto rights.

I think that you should assume that anything that gets to the point of
being a package is used a lot by at least some users. If you say you are
going to clobber the name space in base whenever you feel like it, then
very quickly you will not have users or maintained packages (and then of
course you can do whatever you like with the name space).

Paul Gilbert

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
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: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._