On 4/25/2008 10:41 AM, Simon Urbanek wrote: > On Apr 25, 2008, at 8:46 AM, Peter Dalgaard wrote: > >> Duncan Murdoch wrote: >>> I haven't done it, but I suspect we could introduce special behaviour >>> for ??foo very easily. We could even have a whole hierarchy: >>> >>> ?foo, ??foo, ???foo, ????foo, ... >>> >>> >> Heh, that's rather nice, actually. In words, that could read >> >> ?foo: tell me about foo! >> ??foo: what can you tell me about foo? >> ???foo: what can you tell me about things like foo? >> ????foo: I don't know what I'm looking for but it might be something >> related foo? >> >> You do have to be careful about messing with ?, though. I think many >> people, including me, would pretty quickly go nuts if ?par suddenly >> didn't work the way we're used to. >> > > I strongly agree with that. > > One potential way out could be to offer some extended fall-back in > case the man page doesn't exist. (I'm not sure I like that, either, > but I could get used to it ;).) > > I don't really have a problem with status quo and I think if you want > proper advanced searches, you should be using (or implementing them) > in the GUIs anyway. That is what the new users will be using (and > looking for) in the first place. If they have to count the question > marks instead, they won't know about it (although I like the idea for > advanced users).
I'd like to try to have the search common across all platforms, but the GUIs could present it and the results in their own way. Duncan Murdoch ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
