Re: [R] Age of an object?

From: Philippe Grosjean <>
Date: Sat 14 Jan 2006 - 21:16:11 EST

Martin Maechler wrote:
>>>>>>"Trevor" == Trevor Hastie <>
>>>>>> on Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:51:34 -0800 writes:
> Trevor> It would be nice to have a date stamp on an object.
> Trevor> In S/Splus this was always available, because objects were files.
> [are you sure about "always available"?
> In any case, objects were not single files anymore for a
> long time, at least for S+ on windows, and AFAIK also on
> unixy versions recently ]
> This topic has come up before.
> IIRC, the answer was that for many of us it doesn't make sense
> most of the time:

I remember it was discussed several times. I don't remember why it was considered too difficult to do.

> If you work with *.R files ('scripts') in order to ensure
> reproducibility, you will rerun -- often source() -- these files,
> and the age of the script file is really more interesting.
> Also, I *always* use the equivalent of q(save = "no") and
> almost only use save() to particularly save the results of
> expensive computations {often, simulations}.

OK, now let me give examples where having such an information would ease the work greatly: you have a (graphical) view of the content of an object (for instance, the one using the "view" button in R commander), or you have a graphical object explorer that has a cache to speed up display of information about objects in a given workspace (for instance, the SciViews-R object explorer). What a wonderful feature it will be to tell if an object was changed since last query. In the view, one could have a visual clue if it is up-to-date or not. In the object explorer, I could update information only for objects that have changed...

> Trevor> I have looked around, but I presume this information is not available.
> I assume you will get other answers, more useful to you, which
> will be based on a class of objects which carry an
> 'creation-time' attribute.

Yes, but that would work only for objects designed that way, and only if the methods that manipulate that object do the required housework to update the 'last-changed' attribute (the question was about last access of an object, not about its creation date, so 'last-changed' is a better attribute here). If you access the object directly with, let's say, myobject@myslot <- newvalue, that attribute is not updated, isn't it?


Philippe Grosjean

> Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich
> ______________________________________________
> mailing list
> PLEASE do read the posting guide!
> mailing list PLEASE do read the posting guide! Received on Wed Dec 14 21:29:08 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri 03 Mar 2006 - 03:41:36 EST