Skip to content
Prev 28540 / 63468 Next

RFC: What should ?foo do?

Marc Schwartz wrote:
With the current definition, that's correct, though man("foo") might be 
a better match to Unix-users expectations for a function that did that.  
For a naive user, help("foo") suggests that they're looking for help on 
"foo".
As Brian and Hadley said, that's an implementation issue, already being 
addressed.
Definitely there would need to be a new function, with a new name; if we 
were attaching the name to ? somehow, then it wouldn't matter much what 
name was used.

I haven't done it, but I suspect we could introduce special behaviour 
for ??foo very easily.  We could even have a whole hierarchy:

?foo, ??foo, ???foo, ????foo, ...
Part of the idea behind my suggestion is that it should be somewhat 
automatic for a new user to learn about the different types of help.  
One way for this to happen is the current one:  expect them to find and 
read the manuals.  The suggestion is to make it easier to find the 
different types.  The risk of this is that exposing a new user to a wide 
range of different kinds of results would just be confusing.
Those are probably good ideas, but my guess would be that few users read 
?help.
As all the recent bug reports show, we don't really get feedback until 
code is released, so there's not much of an advantage of 3.0.0 (unless 
we really break the current system) over 2.8.0. 

Duncan Murdoch