>>>>> Dirk Eddelbuettel >>>>> on Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:22:36 -0500 writes:
> The interactive() predicate is helpful in scripted environments. I sometimes > also invoke R with '--quiet' and am unable to suppress messages from my own > startup code as I cannot test if this flag was set or not. (I can work around > it by setting an additional environment variable, but that is clunky.) For me > '--quiet' is independent to 'interactive'. > R carries the state internally in the integer variable R_Quiet, so a minimal > patch only needs to expose an accessor 'quiet()' model after 'interactive()'. > Then we get the desired behaviour: > ~/svn/r-devel$ RD -q >> quiet() > [1] TRUE >> > and this is similarly FALSE in a normal startup without '-q'. > Would this change be of interest? The patch is just a few lines (but does > not yet contain Rd file changes). As Duncan Murdoch recently explained "here" (in the R mailinglists-verse), this is indeed a change that only R-core could do .. and I agree that the change would be relatively small, or rather that most of the work here would be writing / updating documentation, NEWS, etc. On the other hand, this functionality has been "implicitly" in R, forever : > "--quiet" %in% commandArgs() [1] FALSE ... though I agree that using commandArgs() looks a bit "clunky" and may not always do the expected thing (embedded use of R; R Studio / Positron / ....). What do you think? Best, Martin > Cheers, Dirk > -- > dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel