You find some (very brief) information here :
http://www.rforge.net/mediawiki/index.php/Aleph
Cheers
Joris
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Kevin R. Coombes
wrote:
> I have no idea what "aleph" is now or is likely to become.
>
> If I follow your URL for the mailing list and click on the "archive
I have no idea what "aleph" is now or is likely to become.
If I follow your URL for the mailing list and click on the "archives"
link, it tells me that there are no posts and the archive is empty,
which makes it rather difficult to find out what aleph is (or why I
should care).
Perhaps there
2011/10/19 Simon Urbanek :
>
> I'd like to collect as many such ideas as possible so we don't forget
> something in unlikely case Aleph gets off the ground. :)
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
Simon,
>From our department :
Yes, You Can!
Give us an A
Give us an L
Give us an E
Give us a P
Give us an H
Giv
On Oct 18, 2011, at 8:32 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
> On 11-10-18 04:00 PM, Kevin Wright wrote:
>> Hadley,
>>
>> Any chance of changing fun.aggregate to FUN and value_var to value.var?
>>
>> aggregate(.., FUN, ...)
>> acast(..., fun.aggregate, ...)
>>
>> cast(..., value.var)
>> acast(..., value_va
On 11-10-18 04:00 PM, Kevin Wright wrote:
Hadley,
Any chance of changing fun.aggregate to FUN and value_var to value.var?
aggregate(.., FUN, ...)
acast(..., fun.aggregate, ...)
cast(..., value.var)
acast(..., value_var)
Side note: My fantasy for R 3.0 would be to fix the obvious inconsistenci
Hadley,
Any chance of changing fun.aggregate to FUN and value_var to value.var?
aggregate(.., FUN, ...)
acast(..., fun.aggregate, ...)
cast(..., value.var)
acast(..., value_var)
Side note: My fantasy for R 3.0 would be to fix the obvious inconsistencies
in function names/arguments, use Roxygen
Not only is it fun to think about a generic load function, I created one and
it is a pleasure to use--avoids the inconsistent function names that
prompted your post. What's more important, language purity (S3 methods) or
making life simpler for the users (consistency)?
This "import" is not a true
>> Ending names in .foo is a bad idea because of the S3 naming conventions, so
>> I think this is unlikely. But you can always create an alias yourself...
>
> I always thought that S3 was part of the reason for read.ext write.ext. In:
>
> "/path/file.ext"
>
> the "class" of the file is "ext". I k
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Duncan Murdoch
wrote:
> On 18/10/2011 9:37 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
>> read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
>> other reading and writing functio
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Hadley Wickham wrote:
* read.csv and write.csv
* load and save
* readRDS and saveRDS
Even loadRDS/saveRDS or readRDS/writeRDS would be better than the current combo.
You could change the CSV functions to readCSV and writeCSV :)
On 18/10/2011 12:37 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>> Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
>> read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
>> other reading and writing functions.
>
> Ending names in .foo is a bad idea because of the S3 naming
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 08:37 -0500, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
> read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
> other reading and writing functions.
>
> Hadley
>
I would hope not. Those would the
As load involves a side-effect, I would think that loadRDS is a bad idea.
That said, read/write is far more consistent across all languages and
internally with R than read/save is.
My (worthless) vote is for writeRDS.
Jeff
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>>> Is there an
>> Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
>> read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
>> other reading and writing functions.
>
> Ending names in .foo is a bad idea because of the S3 naming conventions, so
> I think this is unlikely. But you
On 18/10/2011 9:37 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
Hi all,
Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
other reading and writing functions.
Ending names in .foo is a bad idea because of the S3 naming convent
I'd second this.
Though my thinking was to add writeRDS instead of saveRDS.
Jeff
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
> read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
> othe
Hi all,
Is there any chance that readRDS and saveRDS might one day become
read.rds and write.rds? That would make them more consistent with the
other reading and writing functions.
Hadley
--
Assistant Professor / Dobelman Family Junior Chair
Department of Statistics / Rice University
http://ha
17 matches
Mail list logo
