On Reproducible Code

That assumes:

* Everyone reads the mailing list before making the first posting

* Everyone reads every part of every email.

I'd argue that both assumptions are false. People are particular well
trained to skip over boilerplate text at the bottom of emails.

I'd suggest an alternative approach is for experts to remember what
it's like to be a novice, and cultivate an attitude of patience and
tolerance.  That's about as likely to happen as a mass change in
behaviour in new users.

Hadley

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 9:48 AM, John Kane <jrkrideau at inbox.com> wrote:

I'd vote for that!
It would probably bug the blazes out of experienced users but the

time savings in getting a newbie to actually supply enough information
so that someone can, at least, try to answer the question would be well
worth it.

John Kane
Kingston ON Canada

-----Original Message-----
From: gunter.berton at gene.com
Sent: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 07:49:28 -0700
To: jrkrideau at inbox.com
Subject: Re: [R] On Reproducible Code

I agree and would like to see it placed at the **TOP** of every

post.

-- Bert

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:11 AM, John Kane <jrkrideau at inbox.com>

wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: jim at bitwrit.com.au
Sent: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:21:36 +1000
To: dcarlson at tamu.edu
Subject: Re: [R] On Reproducible Code

On 07/26/2012 01:50 AM, David L Carlson wrote:

We often refer requesters to the Posting Guide and chide them for

not

reading it.
...
I hesitate to sound too optimistic, but there might be some

advantage

in
making the statement more prominent and adding a reproducible

example

using
dput().

The reponses to some requests for help do seem to get a volley of

the

"reproducible code" answers. Some, such as:

I can't get the answer. PLEASE HELP!!!

probably deserve it, but others appear to emerge from the

overheated

brain of the frustrated noob. With a wonderfully informative name

like

"dput", it is rather challenging to guess that this function is

the way

to calm the affronted guru with an example of your problem. I am
particularly amused by the phrase "reproducible code", which

sounds

perilously close to the definition of a virus. Perhaps the

neglected

little message at the bottom of each email (which seems to

reproduce

itself) might be easier for the uninitiated to understand if it

read:

Please include the R code that is causing the problem _and_ enough

data

(see the "dput" function) for someone else to run the code and get

the

same problem.

I can remember when I didn't know that there was a "dput"

function.

Jim

I can remember spending a lot of time constructing a data set to

post

before someone mentioned ?dput.  Ah, yes, I still have a couple of
generic ones archived.

I think your wording above makes a lot of sense.

Talk?

and most webmails

--

Bert Gunter
Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics

Internal Contact Info:
Phone: 467-7374
Website:

http://pharmadevelopment.roche.com/index/pdb/pdb-functional-groups/pdb-biostatistics/pdb-ncb-home.htm