On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Martin Maechler wrote: > >>>>> "tony" == A J Rossini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>> on Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:33:23 -0700 writes: > > tony> "Warnes, Gregory R" > tony> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> There appears to be no "is.formula()" function in > >> R-1.9.1. May I suggest that > >> > >> is.formula <- function(x) inherits(x, "formula") > >> > >> be added to base, since formula is a fundimental R type? > > tony> why not just > > tony> is(x,"formula") > tony> ? > > because the latter needs the methods package and base functions > must work independently of "methods".
(It would be a `stats' function, I believe, but equally true.) > The question is what "fundamental R type" would be exactly. > But I tend to agree with Greg, since formulae are constructed > via the .Primitive '~' operator. > Apropos, I believe we should move the is.primitive function > from "methods" to "base". Given how long we have lived without either (methods needs is.primitive for its internal workings, only) I believe we should continue to do so. May I remind people that our aim is for base to be as lean as possible, since we now use R *a lot* for computations during installation, checking etc. This discourages adding trivial wrappers like these, especially to base. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595 ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
