get() versus getAnywhere()
Rolf Turner <r.turner at auckland.ac.nz> [Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:01:34PM CEST]:
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?)
E-mail doesn't convey tone, facial expression or gesture. I would give Duncan the benefit of the doubt here.
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.
Ask explicitly, get an explicit answer. A documentation comprising explicit answers would be an FAQ, which in itself is not concise in most cases.
Johannes H?sing There is something fascinating about science.
One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture
mailto:johannes at huesing.name from such a trifling investment of fact.
http://derwisch.wikidot.com (Mark Twain, "Life on the Mississippi")