[R-pkg-devel] How to link executables for non-R-users?
On 16/06/2016 9:56 AM, Michael Cysouw wrote:
I really like the possibility of projects like docopt <http://docopt.org>, providing a bash interface to R functionality. IMHO this is a great way to allow non-R-users to include R functionality in their workflows. There is a docopt package for R which is not yet perfect for my liking, but already goes a long way. <https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/docopt/index.html> I have been experimenting a bit with including docopt scripts into my R packages, and I would like to ask for some feedback how to handle the distribution of such bash-interfaces with R packages. Ideally, such bash-interfaces like docopt should be distributed together with the R packages, and the ?exec? folder seems destined for that goal. Simply adding the package docopt as a requirement in DESCRIPTION also assures that everything just works after installing the package! The main remaining problem is the following: How do non-R-users actually find the bash-executable? The location is rather hidden away :-). Is there a way to link the path to the exec folder to PATH on installing a package? Or is there an easy way to allow people to make an alias in their .bashrc?
Just put a description of what to do into your vignette.
From within R this is not that difficult, using something based on ?find.package?: `file.path(find.package(package_name), "exec", docopt_file_name)` However, I am more thinking about an option for R CMD INSTALL to link an executable to PATH. Would that be sensible? How should that be done?
I don't think packages should be messing with users' PATHs. Document what is necessary, even provide functions in your package to do the work, but don't do it automatically. I think you were suggesting something optional, but I really see no point in that: it is no more work for you to write a function to do the work than it would be for you to handle a request from INSTALL to do the work, but it is a lot more work for us. Duncan Murdoch
Further note that to prevent clogging the PATH with executable, I would propose that package developers only include a single bash-interface to a package, named identically to the package, with multiple functions available as (sub)commands, so a bash user could simply access a function ?bla? from package ?foo? as $ foo bla -OPTIONS [ARGUMENTS] thanks for any feedback michael
______________________________________________ R-package-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel