Re: [R] Does R have a "const object"?

From: <>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:54:26 -0500

On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Barry Rowlingson wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:16 PM, <> wrote:
>> That would defeat the purpose.  Unlocking things in base may be useful
>> for experimenting or debugging but it is not a good idea otherwise.
> You are making experimenting in R more awkward? Then I'm throwing
> "That would defeat the purpose" straight back at you. I remember when
> R was all about the experimenting. Of course it was called Splus back
> then and was only available in grainy black-and-white...

And how does seeing a warning reminding you that you are dong something experimental that might break things make experimenting more awkward? Since you wouldn't like to see such warnings in production code this does make doing something in production code that can break other people's code more awkward. As I do actually care bout whether my code works or not I'm fine with that.


> Oh well, I guess its one small step towards becoming a proper
> grown-up language.
> Barry

Luke Tierney
Statistics and Actuarial Science
Ralph E. Wareham Professor of Mathematical Sciences
University of Iowa                  Phone:             319-335-3386
Department of Statistics and        Fax:               319-335-3017
    Actuarial Science
241 Schaeffer Hall                  email:
Iowa City, IA 52242                 WWW:

______________________________________________ mailing list PLEASE do read the posting guide and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

Received on Wed 16 Mar 2011 - 16:59:10 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Wed 16 Mar 2011 - 17:20:22 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.

list of date sections of archive