Can't there be a cd command?
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:56:23PM -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 5/10/2006 12:15 PM, Jan T. Kim wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:26:55AM -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 5/10/2006 11:10 AM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
On 5/10/06, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
What is it that you find objectionable about having a default for the file argument in read.table? I think Martin has said that he doesn't want non-UI functions to be involved with UI functions, but I don't see that: if your code works now, it will be completely unaffected by setting a default for the argument. (Sorry if I summarized the argument incorrectly, Martin, I didn't look it up.)
That would be my objection too. UI should not be tied to the non-UI core. Its basically a loose coupling argument.
I don't accept that argument, because in R everything* is interactive. There isn't a non-UI core. The function arguments are part of the user interface.
It seems to me that there might be a misunderstanding here; as the term "user" is used to refer to a person interacting with the computer on the one hand, and to refer to a programmer using R on the other hand.
One of the design goals of S and R is to blur the distinction between users and programmers. It is a continuum. R is designed to gently urge non-programmers to become programmers, because the designers think that's the way statistical computing should be done.
That's an idea I like very much too -- much better than the currently popular idea of "protecting" users from the "unfriendliness" of programming, anyway...
Everything being "part of the user interface", in the sense of every user-visible function being part of the API, does not and should not imply that everything should be interactive.
No, I didn't suggest that. What I was suggesting is that it should be *convenient* to use read.table interactively, not that it should be required. (It's already possible, but not convenient, especially for a beginner who doesn't know the secret incantation.)
Well, not knowing a secret is always inconvenient... ;-)
In my experience, interactivity is a rather double-edged thing: On the one hand, it facilitates learning and exploration, but on the other hand, its improper use is frequently detrimental to reproducibility of scientific computation.
I definitely agree with that. It should be convenient to use R non-interactively as well. Anyone who wants reproducibility should be writing packages and scripts or vignettes that run non-interactively.
Ok, I fully agree with this -- seems that I've interpreted the statement that "in R everything is interactive" a bit too narrowly.
That's why I am emphasizing that this change will have no effect on existing code. I wouldn't suggest it if it did.
That's an important point too, obviously. I'm not entirely convinced about the convenience aspect, as I find file choosers of all sorts disruptive to workflow... but that's perhaps a matter of personal taste. Best regards, Jan
+- Jan T. Kim -------------------------------------------------------+ | email: jtk at cmp.uea.ac.uk | | WWW: http://www.cmp.uea.ac.uk/people/jtk | *-----=< hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans >=-----*