On 01/15/2013 03:25 PM, elijah wright wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Hervé Pagès <hpa...@fhcrc.org <mailto:hpa...@fhcrc.org>> wrote: and given R's modularity that is fortunately not very often the case. Modularity would be even better if more things *in core* were made generics. For example why the stuff in parallel was not made generic? (at least S3 generic) The better to give interesting people GSoC projects with, of course! ;-) ... nearly everyone appreciates patches that improve their projects to noticeable benefit. If you like parallel better a different way... collude and make it rock.
Sure. And in that particular case the patch wouldn't be hard to produce. My comment was more in the context of the roadmap discussion. So to make my point clear I believe that having an official public roadmap can't hurt, even for a project that has reached some level of maturity. One obvious benefit is that it provides more opportunity for discussion/suggestions/input between the community and R core *before* things happen. In the case of the parallel package, maybe there are good reasons for not making the stuff in parallel generic, I don't know. I could go ahead and start working on a patch now, living in my own world, following my own dream, but I'd rather try to discuss this a little bit before. Don't you think? To make my point even clearer, I think having a public roadmap is by itself a sign of maturity. Rather than not having one. Cheers, H.
best, --e
-- Hervé Pagès Program in Computational Biology Division of Public Health Sciences Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Ave. N, M1-B514 P.O. Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024 E-mail: hpa...@fhcrc.org Phone: (206) 667-5791 Fax: (206) 667-1319 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
