R devel - Dec 2020 - anonymous functions

I mostly agree with your comments on anonymous functions.

However, I think the main problem is cryptic-ness, rather than succinct-ness.
The backslash is a relatively universal symbol within programming
languages with C-like (ALGOL-like?) syntax.
Where it denotes escape sequences within strings.

Using the leading character for escape sequences, to define functions,
is like using integers to define floating point numbers:

    my.integer <- as.integer (2) * pi

Arguably, the motive is more to be ultra-succinct than cryptic.
But either way, we get syntax which is difficult to read, from a
mathematical and statistical perspective.


On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:04 AM Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel
<r-devel at r-project.org> wrote:
>
> ?The shorthand form \(x) x + 1 is parsed as function(x) x + 1. It may be
helpful in making
> code containing simple function expressions more readable.?
>
> Color me unimpressed.
> Over the decades I've seen several "who can write the shortest
code" threads: in Fortran,
> in C, in Splus, ...   The same old idea that "short" is a synonym
for either elegant,
> readable, or efficient is now being recylced in the tidyverse.   The truth
is that "short"
> is actually an antonym for all of these things, at least for anyone else
reading the code;
> or for the original coder 30-60 minutes after the "clever" lines
were written.  Minimal
> use of the spacebar and/or the return key isn't usually held up as a
goal, but creeps into
> many practiioner's code as well.
>
> People are excited by replacing "function(" with "\("? 
Really?   Are people typing code
> with their thumbs?
> I am ambivalent about pipes: I think it is a great concept, but too many of
my colleagues
> think that using pipes = no need for any comments.
>
> As time goes on, I find my goal is to make my code less compact and more
readable.  Every
> bug fix or new feature in the survival package now adds more lines of
comments or other
> documentation than lines of code.  If I have to puzzle out what a line
does, what about
> the poor sod who inherits the maintainance?
>
>
> --
> Terry M Therneau, PhD
> Department of Health Science Research
> Mayo Clinic
> therneau at mayo.edu
>
> "TERR-ree THUR-noh"
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

Sorry, I should replace "cryptic-ness" from my last post, with
"unnecessary cryptic-ness".
Sometimes short symbolic expressions are necessary.


P.S.
Often, I wish I could write: f (x) = x^2.
But that's replacement function syntax.


On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:56 AM Abby Spurdle <spurdle.a at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> I mostly agree with your comments on anonymous functions.
>
> However, I think the main problem is cryptic-ness, rather than
succinct-ness.
> The backslash is a relatively universal symbol within programming
> languages with C-like (ALGOL-like?) syntax.
> Where it denotes escape sequences within strings.
>
> Using the leading character for escape sequences, to define functions,
> is like using integers to define floating point numbers:
>
>     my.integer <- as.integer (2) * pi
>
> Arguably, the motive is more to be ultra-succinct than cryptic.
> But either way, we get syntax which is difficult to read, from a
> mathematical and statistical perspective.
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:04 AM Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel
> <r-devel at r-project.org> wrote:
> >
> > ?The shorthand form \(x) x + 1 is parsed as function(x) x + 1. It may
be helpful in making
> > code containing simple function expressions more readable.?
> >
> > Color me unimpressed.
> > Over the decades I've seen several "who can write the
shortest code" threads: in Fortran,
> > in C, in Splus, ...   The same old idea that "short" is a
synonym for either elegant,
> > readable, or efficient is now being recylced in the tidyverse.   The
truth is that "short"
> > is actually an antonym for all of these things, at least for anyone
else reading the code;
> > or for the original coder 30-60 minutes after the "clever"
lines were written.  Minimal
> > use of the spacebar and/or the return key isn't usually held up as
a goal, but creeps into
> > many practiioner's code as well.
> >
> > People are excited by replacing "function(" with
"\("?  Really?   Are people typing code
> > with their thumbs?
> > I am ambivalent about pipes: I think it is a great concept, but too
many of my colleagues
> > think that using pipes = no need for any comments.
> >
> > As time goes on, I find my goal is to make my code less compact and
more readable.  Every
> > bug fix or new feature in the survival package now adds more lines of
comments or other
> > documentation than lines of code.  If I have to puzzle out what a line
does, what about
> > the poor sod who inherits the maintainance?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Terry M Therneau, PhD
> > Department of Health Science Research
> > Mayo Clinic
> > therneau at mayo.edu
> >
> > "TERR-ree THUR-noh"
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel