IMO it’s technically challenging to implement (I’d spitball two really good
R developers for a year to get it started) and the most compelling benefits
are reasonably far in the future. Additionally, I don’t think there’s broad
consensus about what a type system for R should even look like.

Hadley

On Wednesday, November 26, 2025, ivo welch <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> I am more interested why something like this has not made its way into R
> core as a first step to type checking *for everyone*.  (I could imagine
> that an option would turn on and off some automatic stopifnot like checking
> given a standardized annotation form [type, dim].)
>
> is it because there is not much wider interest and desirability (so even a
> basic working implementation would not be pulled into R by the powers that
> are in charge), or is it because the work is too difficult and no one had
> time to work on it?
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 8:50 AM Hadley Wickham <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> You might be interested in Jim Hester’s old experiment that used ? -
>> https://github.com/jimhester/types
>>
>> Hadley
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 17, 2025, IVO I WELCH <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Suggestion for Syntax Sugar:
>>>
>>> Would it make sense to permit a simple way to allow a coder to document
>>> the function argument type?
>>>
>>> f <- function( a:chr, b:data.frame, c:logi ) { … }
>>>
>>> presumably, what comes behind the ‘:’ should match what ‘str’ returns.
>>>
>>> however, this need not be checked (except perhaps when a particular
>>> option is set).  catching errors as soon as possible makes code easier to
>>> debug and error messages clearer.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> /iaw
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> [email protected] mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://hadley.nz
>>
>

-- 
http://hadley.nz

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

Reply via email to