On 2011-04-25 08:47, Sean O'Riordain wrote:
Good afternoon,

As a clarification does it make sense to remove the second 'not' in the 'See
Also' documentation for file_test ?

Both versions make sense to me; it's just a question of
whether we think of testing for x 'being a directory'
or for x 'not being a directory'.

The code (for the '-f' op) actually tests !isdir and
so the current wording reflects the code.

Peter Ehlers


Kind regards,
Sean O'Riordain

-----
Index: src/library/utils/man/filetest.Rd
===================================================================
--- src/library/utils/man/filetest.Rd   (revision 55639)
+++ src/library/utils/man/filetest.Rd   (working copy)
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
  }
  \seealso{
    \code{\link{file.exists}} which only tests for existence
-  (\code{test -e} on some systems) but not for not being a directory.
+  (\code{test -e} on some systems) but not for being a directory.

    \code{\link{file.path}}, \code{\link{file.info}}
  }

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

Reply via email to