Previously reported by Martin as a plot.formula issue, but I believe
it boils down to this:
> f <- function(x,...)match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)
> g <- function(x,y=2,...)f(x,y=y,...)
> g(1)
f(x = x, ... = list(y = y, ...))> g(1,b=2)
f(x = x, ... = list(y = y, b = 2))> g(1,y=2)
f(x = x, ... = list(y = y, ...))
Notice that ... appears if all actual arguments to g are matched in
the call to f. This is the *name* "..." as in
as.name("..."). I would
have expected just ... = list(y = y) in those cases.
Simpler
> f <- function(x,...)match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)
> g <- function(x,...)f(x,...)
> g(1)
f(x = x, ... = list(...))> g(1,2)
f(x = x, ... = list(..1 = 2))> g(1,a=2)
f(x = x, ... = list(a = 2))
or yet again simpler
> f <- function(...)match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)
> g <- function(...)f(...)
> g(1)
f(... = list(..1 = 1))> g()
f(... = list(...))> f()
f()
For comparison, Splus 3.4 has this kind of stuff:
> f <- function(...)match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)
> g <- function(...)f(...)
> g()
f(... = list())> f()
f(... = list())> g(1)
f(... = list(1))> g(a=1)
f(... = list(a = 1))
I don't see why we don't do the same (although given differences in
lazy evaluation, there might be a point to it), but just getting rid
of the ... in the lists would help quite a bit.
--
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3
c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N
(*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To:
r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
