On 27/12/2017 9:11 AM, Sun Yijiang wrote:
Thanks for the details. I’m new to R, and I’m not blaming anything here,
just that I’m still not clear what good it makes to keep this inconsistency
between R and Rscript. To me (and probably to many others from Perl/Python
etc.), this is shockingly weird. I can live with that, and I also want to
know why.
As Dirk said, the argument was that the methods package used to take a
long time to load, and many uses of Rscript shouldn't have to pay that
time cost. I don't know whether that's still true or not. Dirk and I
agree that the inconsistency between R and Rscript is undesirable, but
neither of us is in a position to change it, or thinks it's worth the
effort to argue for a change.
Duncan
Steve
Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org>于2017年12月27日 周三21:15写道：
Duncan,
Very nice tutorial. However it does NOT take away from the fact that _very_
simple_ scripts (like the one posted by Sun at the beginning of this
thread)
simply _fail_ in error under Rscript.
Whereas they don't under R or r.
The R environment ships an interpreter meant for command-line and scripting
use which fails on simple scripts that happen to use S4. But I am tired of
arguing for reversing this as I have gotten nowhere in all those years.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
