On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 15:18 -0600, Peng Yu wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Peng Yu <pengyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Greg Snow <greg.s...@imail.org> wrote: > >> The invert argument seems a likely candidate, you could also do perl=TRUE > >> and use negations within the pattern (but that is probably overkill for > >> your original question). </snip /> > Here is another bad example. See ?rep. The Usage section has 'rep(x, > ...)'. However, '...' is only explained later in Arguments. I know > that it is probably because '...' is from functions underlying rep(). > But it does not matter to end users whether they are from an > underlying function or not. Why not put the arguments in the Usage > section?
Because '...' is the argument to rep. Should we document very argument for every rep method in existence within this help file? The '...' has nothing to do with functions underlying rep if you mean "inside" rep, it is just the means by which arguments are passed from the generic to methods for objects of particular classes. > Similar cases can be found in the help of many functions. Probably because that's how the S3 method system works. If you learn how and why the R system works, things will make much more sense. G <snip /> -- %~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~% Dr. Gavin Simpson [t] +44 (0)20 7679 0522 ECRC, UCL Geography, [f] +44 (0)20 7679 0565 Pearson Building, [e] gavin.simpsonATNOSPAMucl.ac.uk Gower Street, London [w] http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucfagls/ UK. WC1E 6BT. [w] http://www.freshwaters.org.uk %~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~% ______________________________________________ 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.
