Dear Tomas,Thank you.Regarding the "unnumbered" arguments, i.e.
sprintf('%f %f', 1, 2, 3). This was the case I wanted to report, here a
warning can be very useful.Regarding the "numbered" arguments, that
is, sprintf('%$1f %$3f', 1, 2, 3). Here, omission of an argument might
be intended, for example, in an application with support for multiple languages.
Therefore, I am wondering if a warning should be raised.Regarding the mixture:
never heard that this works, and I would probably not want to use it...Your work
is much appreciated, thanks again.Best regards,Matthias
-------- Urspr?ngliche Nachricht --------Von: Tomas Kalibera <tomas.kalibera
at gmail.com> Datum: 04.11.20 15:43 (GMT+01:00) An: Matthias Gondan
<matthias-gondan at gmx.de>, r-devel at r-project.org Betreff: Re: [Rd]
sprintf, check number of parameters Dear Matthias,thanks for the suggestion,
R-devel now warns on unused arguments by format (both numbered and un-numbered).
It seems that the new warning is useful, often it finds cases when arguments
were accidentally passed to sprintf but had been meant for a different
function.R allows combining both numbered and un-numbered references in a single
format, even though it may be better to avoid and POSIX does not allow
that.BestTomasOn 9/20/20 1:03 PM, Matthias Gondan wrote:> Dear R
developers,>> I am wondering if this should raise an error or a
warning.>>> sprintf('%.f, %.f', 1, 2, 3)> [1] "1,
2">> I am aware that R has ?numbered? sprintf arguments
(sprintf('%1$.f', ?), and in that case, omissing of specific arguments
may be intended. But in the usual syntax, omission of an argument is probably a
mistake.>> Thank you for your consideration.>> Best wishes,>>
Matthias>>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]>>
______________________________________________> R-devel at r-project.org
mailing list> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]