On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 16:24 +0100, Martin Maechler wrote: > >>>>> Jan Gorecki <j.gore...@wit.edu.pl> > >>>>> on Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:20:37 +0000 writes: > > > Martin, I submitted very simple patch on > > https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17176 > > > Herve, While I like your idea, I prefer to keep my patch > > simple, it is now exactly what Martin mentions. I think it > > is a good start that can eventually be extended later for > > what you are asking. > > I tend to agree; this seems indeed much easier than I > anticipated. Thank you, Jan! > > I'm testing a version which uses the logical variable > 'stop_on_error' rather than 'no_stop_on_error' (because > !no_stop_on_error is hard to mentally parse quickly). > > My proposed name '--no-stop-on-error' was a quick shot; if > somebody has a more concise or better "English style" wording > (which is somewhat compatible with all the other options you see > from 'R CMD check --help'), > please speak up.
I might suggest --stop-tests-on-error with default=TRUE to match current functionality. This might avoid any confusion related to the behavior of continuing to run examples on error in R CMD check. Regards, Brian ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
