Barry Rowlingson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote:
>
> > BTW: If you ever actually need to do something like that, try
> > eval(substitute(foo(x)<-10,list(foo=as.name(if (cond) "names" else
> > "dim"))))
>
> please nooooo!!! What's wrong with:
>
> if(cond){
> names(x) <- 10
> } else {
> dim(x) <- 10
> }
>
> readable, obvious, maintainable, 'portable' for some value of
> 'portable'....
Well, there's nothing nonportable with my suggestion either. I thought
that "ever actually need to" would suffice to indicate that I wasn't
suggesting it as good programming practice.
Nothing wrong with your code, except perhaps generality; I was
thinking in terms of "function that specifies which replacement
function to use", which could involve a larger set of possible
functions than names()<- and dim()<-.
However, I'd be hard pressed to come up with a case where this would
occur in practice.
--
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3
c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N
(*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
