get() versus getAnywhere()
On 19/04/2009 4:01 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 19/04/2009, at 9:45 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 18/04/2009 8:47 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 17/04/2009, at 10:21 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Benjamin Tyner wrote:
Many thanks Duncan. Perhaps this merits a more explicit note in the documentation?
The quote I gave is from the documentation. How could it be more explicit?
This is unfortunately typical of the attitude of R-core people toward the documentation. ``It's clear.'' they say. ``It's explicit.'' Clear and explicit once you *know* what it's saying. Not before, but.
But I didn't say that. I asked how to make it more explicit.
Oh come on Duncan! You did *not*. You asked (rhetorical question) ``How could it be more explicit?'' (Implied: How could it ***possibly*** be more explicit?)
Well, I have to admit that I was thinking "***possibly***", but I didn't write it, because I wanted a suggested revision. I didn't get one, and still haven't, even after asking again. I won't ask a third time; I already put something in, and if that doesn't satisfy you, then I think you'll likely go to your grave unsatisfied. You have to understand the process here: - You (or Benjamin, in this case) find something unclear, but don't suggest a clarification. - I read it, find it clear, assume you didn't because you didn't read the man page (or are mentally deficient), but I'm polite enough to point out where I found the explicit explanation. - You (this time really you) complain that it isn't clear, but *still* don't write a revision. Now, at either the 1st or 3rd step, it would have been much easier for you (or Benjamin) to suggest a change that would have been clear to you, than it was for me to try to imagine what it is like to live in your head, and figure out what would be clear to you.
In this case the documentation is quite opaque to me, and I would suspect to a good many like me.
What change would make it less opaque?
For one thing, point out ***explicitly***, as you did in your post, that getAnywhere() doesn't actually get ***anywhere***. Only some wheres.
We said where it looks. That still seems explicit to me. There are a lot of places where it doesn't look, and now it lists two of them, but I expect to hear complaints from you that I didn't mention the fact that it doesn't look in your back garden.
(How's that for Canuck English, Berwin?) cheers, Rolf ###################################################################### Attention: This e-mail message is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author. This e-mail has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal www.marshalsoftware.com ######################################################################
My message is neither privileged nor confidential, and hasn't been cleared by anybody. Duncan Murdoch