pdbailey at uchicago.edu
2006-Jun-16 19:08 UTC
[Rd] cat, print and documentation disagree (PR#8992)
The tone of your email makes it look like you think the exact output of cat and print in these instances is irrelevant and not worth thinking about and that the documentation is `close enough,' or up to the (perhaps implied) R documentation standard. This is a reasonable stance. If you hold it, please just circular file my bug report as irrelevant and let's not waste any more time on it. But I'll focus on the claim you made explicitly. in response to my pointing out that the documentation says that, ```cat' converts numeric/complex vectors in the same way as `print' (and not in the same way as `as.character' which is used by the S equivalent), so 'options' '"digits"' and '"scipen"' are relevant.'' You wrote that, ``[the cat() documentation] does not say that it outputs the same characters [as print].'' You basic claim then is that they both convert numeric vectors into characters in the same way, but that after the conversion `cat()' mutates those characters (into subsets of the converted characters), and that this second step in the process of mutating the numbers into characters is not part of the `conversion' of the number into characters. If you do choose to stick by this odd claim, let me point out that the claim implies that the documentation regards an internal process that the user doesn't much care about because she can never see the internal results without overriding `cat().' I think what the documentation is saying is that in both `print()' and `cat()' use the `options()' `digits' are `sciphen' to the specificity they are described in the `options()' documentation, but `cat()' and `print()' do not follow the same convention to the extent that the `options()' documentation does not specify the requirement. Cheers, Paul