>>>>> "VG" == Vincent Goulet <vincent.gou...@act.ulaval.ca> >>>>> on Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:24:21 -0400 writes:
VG> Le jeu. 3 juin à 09:27, Ben Bolker a écrit : >> Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>>>> "BB" == Ben Bolker <bol...@ufl.edu> >>>>>>>> on Wed, 02 Jun 2010 13:45:18 -0400 writes: >>> BB> Michael Dewey wrote: >>>>> At 13:40 01/06/2010, Ben Bolker wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> On 25/05/10 23:25 PM, "Ben Bolker" <bolker <at> ufl.edu> wrote: >>>>>>> Just curious: is there a particular reason why install.packages() >>>>>>> gives a warning in normal use when 'lib' is not specified (e.g. argument >>>>>>> 'lib' is missing: using '/usr/local/lib/R/site-library' )? >>>>> >>>>> As I see it R is saying 'I am doing what you told >>>>> me, but just in case I am checking whether that >>>>> was what you really wanted'. Note that you do not >>>>> get a warning if there was only one place R could >>>>> put it. I would certainly vote for a message if >>>>> people are getting unnecessarily alarmed by the warning. >>> BB> But this seems so different from R's general philosophy/behavior BB> (inherited from Unix?) that a function that gets correct input and BB> executes without error returns silently ... >>> >>> That's correct. >>> Note however that installing a package is not just a thing >>> happening in your R session. >>> It will affect all your future R sessions, and possibly even >>> other users' who have the same .libPaths()[1] >>> {e.g. the group here does share it}. >>> >>> I'd agree to not put a warning but I'd definitely want a message >>> aka "note" to the user. >>> The *wording* of that note should not be alarming at all, I >>> agree, just a note to the user. >>> >>> Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich >> >> OK, then, how about this as a minimal change? >> >> =================================================================== >> --- packages.R (revision 52192) >> +++ packages.R (working copy) >> @@ -534,8 +534,8 @@ >> >> if(missing(lib) || is.null(lib)) { >> lib <- .libPaths()[1L] >> - warning(gettextf("argument 'lib' is missing: using %s", lib), >> - immediate. = TRUE, domain = NA) >> + message(gettextf("argument 'lib' is missing: using %s", lib), >> + domain = NA) >> } >> >> paths <- .find.package(pkgs, lib) >> Index: packages2.R >> =================================================================== >> --- packages2.R (revision 52192) >> +++ packages2.R (working copy) >> @@ -193,8 +193,8 @@ >> if(missing(lib) || is.null(lib)) { >> lib <- .libPaths()[1L] >> if(length(.libPaths()) > 1L) >> - warning(gettextf("argument 'lib' is missing: using '%s'", lib), >> - immediate. = TRUE, domain = NA) >> + message(gettextf("argument 'lib' is missing: using '%s'", lib), >> + domain = NA) >> } >> >> ## check for writability by user VG> I wholeheartedly support the change discussed here since it is also something that has been worrying my students for some time. VG> However, I think saying "argument 'lib' not specified: using '%s'" would be even less alarming. "... is missing" sort of implies the user forgot something. Yes, thank you Vincent, I meant some such change when I said >>> The *wording* of that note should not be alarming at all, I >>> agree, just a note to the user. I'd even change it further, to something like "Installing package into '%s' (as 'lib' is not specified)" Martin VG> Dr. Vincent Goulet VG> Full Professor VG> École d'actuariat, Université Laval, Québec VG> vincent.gou...@act.ulaval.ca http://vgoulet.act.ulaval.ca >> >> >> -- >> Ben Bolker >> Associate professor, Biology Dep't, Univ. of Florida >> *** NEW E-MAIL ADDRESSES: >> *** bbol...@gmail.com , bol...@math.mcmaster.ca >> bol...@ufl.edu / people.biology.ufl.edu/bolker >> GPG key: people.biology.ufl.edu/bolker/benbolker-publickey.asc >> >> <signature.asc><ATT00001..txt> ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel