> > I too find R's lexical scoping rules straightforward.
> > However, I'd say that if your code relies on lexical
> > scoping to find something, you should probably rewrite your code.
>
> Except of course that almost every function relies on lexical
> scoping to some extent!
This could get messy, because a) that's true and b) it actually leads to some
genuine risks when 'globals' get redefined or masked*.
How about I amend the assertion to "if your code relies on lexical scoping to
find a variable you defined, you should probably rewrite your code."
and leave it at that, subject to some common sense about whether you know what
you're doing?
Steve E
*Example
> sin.deg <- function(deg) sin(deg * pi/180)
> sin.deg(45)
[1] 0.7071068
#looks about right
> pi <- 3.2 #Indiana General Assembly bill #247, 1897.
> sin.deg(45)
[1] 0.7173561
#oops ...
*******************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use...{{dropped:8}}
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
