"Liaw, Andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My $0.02: > > If Jack feels that the fact that functions usually return a single list, and > one needs to access the components of the list separately, is somehow > hideous, then I'd rather suggest that R is perhaps the wrong language for > him. > > To me the suggested `workarounds' are by far much more hideous... They turn > perfectly tranparent code into... gee, I don't even know how to begin > describing them...
I'm not sure that the idea of multiple assignment as such is all that horrid. Other languages have them and it's actually kind of fun to see if you can come up with a neat implementation. However, Gabor is definitely on the wrong track with list()<- It is the kind of thing that looks like a good idea initially, but if you think things through from a consistency viewpoint, you realize that it doesn't quite make sense. Replacement functions are just that - replacement functions. They logically require that there is an object within which there is something to replace. -- 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 PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
