R help - Sep 2019 - [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Hi Richard,

Sure, it's a silly example, but it makes about as much sense as using
"slave" to mean "quiet". Also, there is no
"--master" option so it's not
exactly the master/slave terminology here either.

My only point is that I think it's very distasteful to give such a
needlessly awful name to an option in what has become a very broadly used
piece of software. It would be good to update it, I think.

If anyone knows how to actually pass this on to the R
developers/contributors, please let me know.

Thanks,
Ben

On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 05:14, Richard O'Keefe <raoknz at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Nobody would use "stentorian" as an alternative to
"verbose" because they
> mean very different things.
>   "verbose" means "using many words"
>   "stentorian" means "talking very loudly, like Stentor,
whose voice was
> as powerful
>                       as fifty voices of other men".
> You can be verbose while talking in a whisper.
> You can be stentorian while being laconic.
>
> If you don't like the word "slave", the option
"--silent" is there for you
> to use.
>
> The "master-slave" design pattern is in hundreds of books
(although I note
> that
> Erlang uses different terminology).  Your car has a master hydraulic
> cylinder and
> slave cylinders.  The analogy is pervasive in technology.  See a very
> short list
> at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)
> which ends with "Global Language Monitor
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Language_Monitor> found the
term
> "master/slave" to be the most
> egregious example of political correctness
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness> in 2004, and
named
> it the most politically
> incorrect term of that year."
>
> The one thing "slave" does not mean in technology is any kind of
human
> being.
>
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 21:51, Benjamin Lang <langbnj at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> Dear Richard,
>>
>> Thank you, that?s interesting. There is also something called an
>> ?etymological fallacy?. I think current usage is more useful here than
the
>> ?science of truth?, i.e. the Ancient Greek idea that the (sometimes
>> inferred) derivation of a word allows us to grasp ?the truth of it?.
>>
>> In current usage, a ?server? is someone who brings you dishes in a
>> restaurant. A ?client? is a customer. A ?slave? is a human being forced
to
>> perform work under duress and considered nothing more than a machine,
say a
>> dishwasher or a tractor. And in some regions, this echoes on and is
>> offensive and hurtful to some.
>>
>> A new user, wanting to reduce output from R, would probably reach for
>> ?-q? or ??quiet?. This makes sense in the same way that ??stentorian?
is
>> not a good alternative to ??verbose?.
>>
>> Best,
>> Ben
>>
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 10:55, Richard O'Keefe <raoknz at
gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> One of my grandfathers was from Croatia.  Guess what the word
"slave" is
>> derived
>> from?  That's right, Slavs.  This goes back to the 9th century. 
And then
>> of course
>> my grandfather's people were enslaved by the Ottoman empire, which
was
>> only defeated
>> a little over a hundred years ago.  My other grandfather was from the
>> British isles,
>> where to this day followers of the same prophet are enslaving people
like
>> me
>> (except for being female).  So I'm sorry, but I'm not
impressed.
>>
>> How many computers are "servers"?  There's that whole
client-server thing.
>> Guess what "server" comes from?  That's right, the Latin
word "servus",
>> which
>> means guess what?  You got it again: "slave".  Are we to
abolish the word
>> "server"?  What about the word "client"?  Ah,
that's part of the
>> client-patron
>> system from Rome, so what about the patriarchy, eh?
>>
>> We are dealing with something called "the genetic fallacy".
>> "The genetic *fallacy* (also known as the *fallacy of origins*
...)
>>  is a *fallacy* of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's
>>  or something's history, *origin*, or source rather than its
>>  current meaning or context."  (Wikipedia.)
>>
>> Context matters.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 17:10, Abby Spurdle <spurdle.a at
gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Personally I much prefer backwards compatibility to political
>>> correctness.
>>>
>>> I agree with Rolf, here.
>>> And as someone that's planning to write a Linux Terminal
Emulator, in
>>> the medium-term future, I *strongly* defend this approach.
>>>
>>> And to the original poster.
>>> Haven't you seen The Matrix?
>>> (Second best movie ever, after the Shawshank Redemption).
>>>
>>> I would prefer the technology to be my slave, than I be a
>>> prisoner/slave to the technology.
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more,
see
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>>> PLEASE do read the posting guide
>>> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>>>
>>
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

> Sure, it's a silly example, but it makes about as much sense as using
> "slave" to mean "quiet". 
It doesn't. It's a set of options chosen for when R is called as a slave
process from a controlling process, and in that it is a reasonable description
of the circumstance.

--quiet is a separate command line option with different effect.




*******************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use, copying or
disclosure other than by the intended recipient is unauthorised. If 
you have received this message in error, please notify the sender 
immediately via +44(0)20 8943 7000 or notify postmaster at lgcgroup.com 
and delete this message and any copies from your computer and network. 
LGC Limited. Registered in England 2991879. 
Registered office: Queens Road, Teddington, Middlesex, TW11 0LY, UK

Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something that *can* be
done that's genuinely helpful.
>From the R(1) manual page:
       -q, --quiet
              Don't print startup message

       --silent
              Same as --quiet

       --slave
              Make R run as quietly as possible

It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of --quiet.  So perhaps

    -q, --quiet
        Don't print the startup message.  This is the only output that
is suppressed.

    --silent
        Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup message only.

    --slave
        Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is for use when running R as a
        subordinate process.  See "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
        https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
        for an example.

On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 02:29, Stephen Ellison <S.Ellison at lgcgroup.com>
wrote:
>
> > Sure, it's a silly example, but it makes about as much sense as
using
> > "slave" to mean "quiet".
> It doesn't. It's a set of options chosen for when R is called as a
slave process from a controlling process, and in that it is a reasonable
description of the circumstance.
>
> --quiet is a separate command line option with different effect.
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> This email and any attachments are confidential. Any u...{{dropped:13}}