Currently, writing R extensions states: "The ?Package? and ?Version? fields give the name and the version of the package, respectively. The name should consist of letters, numbers, and the dot character and start with a letter. " Now that _ is no longer an assignment operator, could it be added to this list? Hadley -- http://had.co.nz/
>>>>> Hadley Wickham writes:> Currently, writing R extensions states: "The ?Package? and ?Version? > fields give the name and the version of the package, respectively. The > name should consist of letters, numbers, and the dot character and > start with a letter. "> Now that _ is no longer an assignment operator, could it be added to > this list?This would make it trickier to parse PACKAGE_VERSION.tar.gz et al file names, and break lots of code based on this naming scheme. -k> Hadley> -- > http://had.co.nz/> ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> Currently, writing R extensions states: "The ?Package? and ?Version? >> fields give the name and the version of the package, respectively. The >> name should consist of letters, numbers, and the dot character and >> start with a letter. " > >> Now that _ is no longer an assignment operator, could it be added to >> this list? > > This would make it trickier to parse PACKAGE_VERSION.tar.gz et al file > names, and break lots of code based on this naming scheme.Oh, good point. Hadley -- http://had.co.nz/
Hadley Wickham wrote:> Currently, writing R extensions states: "The ?Package? and ?Version? > fields give the name and the version of the package, respectively. The > name should consist of letters, numbers, and the dot character and > start with a letter. " > > Now that _ is no longer an assignment operator, could it be added to this list?Hadley, it is used as the separator between packagename and version number in the name of a package. And (at least my) code relies on the fact that there is exactly one "_" in the filename. Best, Uwe> Hadley >