R devel - Mar 2023 - WISH: Optional mechanism preventing var <<- value from assigning non-existing variable

Why should it make an exception for cases where the about-to-be-assigned-to
name is present in the global environment?  I think it should warn or give
an error if the altered variable is in any environment on the search list.

-Bill

On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 10:54?AM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think that should be the default behaviour. It's pretty late to get
> that into R 4.3.0, but I think your proposal (with check.superassignment
> = FALSE being the default) could make it in, and 4.4.0 could change the
> default to TRUE.
>
> Duncan
>
>
>
> On 19/03/2023 12:08 p.m., Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
> > I'd like to be able to prevent the <<- assignment operator
("super
> > assignment") from assigning to the global environment unless the
> > variable already exists and is not locked.  If it does not exist or is
> > locked, I'd like an error to be produced.  This would allow me to
> > evaluate expressions with this temporarily set to protect against
> > mistakes.
> >
> > For example, I'd like to do something like:
> >
> > $ R --vanilla
> >> exists("a")
> > [1] FALSE
> >
> >> options(check.superassignment = TRUE)
> >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> > Error: object 'a' not found
> >
> >> a <- 0
> >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> >> a
> > [1] 1
> >
> >> rm("a")
> >> options(check.superassignment = FALSE)
> >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> >> exists("a")
> > [1] TRUE
> >
> >
> > BACKGROUND:
> >
> >  From help("<<-") we have:
> >
> > "The operators <<- and ->> are normally only used in
functions, and
> > cause a search to be made through parent environments for an existing
> > definition of the variable being assigned. If such a variable is found
> > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined, otherwise
> > assignment takes place in the global environment."
> >
> > I argue that it's unfortunate that <<- fallbacks back to
assigning to
> > the global environment if the variable does not already exist.
> > Unfortunately, it has become a "go to" solution for many to
use it
> > that way.  Sometimes it is intended, sometimes it's a mistake.  We
> > find it also in R packages on CRAN, even if 'R CMD check'
tries to
> > detect when it happens (but it's limited to do so from run-time
> > examples and tests).
> >
> > It's probably too widely used for us to change to a more strict
> > behavior permanent.  The proposed R option allows me, as a developer,
> > to evaluate an R expression with the strict behavior, especially if I
> > don't trust the code.
> >
> > With 'check.superassignment = TRUE' set, a developer would
have to
> > first declare the variable in the global environment for <<- to
assign
> > there.  This would remove the fallback "If such a variable is
found
> > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined, otherwise
> > assignment takes place in the global environment" in the current
> > design.  For those who truly intends to assign to the global, could
> > use assign(var, value, envir = globalenv()) or globalenv()[[var]]
<-
> > value.
> >
> > 'R CMD check' could temporarily set 'check.superassignment
= TRUE'
> > during checks.  If we let environment variable
> > 'R_CHECK_SUPERASSIGNMENT' set the default value of option
> > 'check.superassignment' on R startup, it would be possible to
check
> > packages optionally this way, but also to run any
"non-trusted" R
> > script in the "strict" mode.
> >
> >
> > TEASER:
> >
> > Here's an example why using <<- for assigning to the global
> > environment is a bad idea:
> >
> > This works:
> >
> > $ R --vanilla
> >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep <<- x;
x^2 })
> >> keep
> >> [1] 3
> >
> >
> > This doesn't work:
> >
> > $ R --vanilla
> >> library(purrr)
> >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep <<- x;
x^2 })
> > Error in keep <<- x : cannot change value of locked binding for
'keep'
> >
> >
> > But, if we "declare" the variable first, it works:
> >
> > $ R --vanilla
> >> library(purrr)
> >> keep <- 0
> >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep <<- x;
x^2 })
> >> keep
> >> [1] 3
> >
> > /Henrik
> >
> > PS. Does the <<- operator have an official name? Hadley calls it
> > "super assignment" in 'Advanced R'
> > (https://adv-r.hadley.nz/environments.html), which is where I got it
> > from.
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 19/03/2023 2:15 p.m., Bill Dunlap wrote:
> Why should it make an exception for cases where the 
> about-to-be-assigned-to name is present in the global environment?? I 
> think it should warn or give an error if the altered variable is in any 
> environment on the search list.
I'd say code like this should work:

   x <- NULL
   f <- function() x <<- 123
   f()

and then x should be changed to 123 unless the binding to x is locked. 
I don't see why it should matter if this code is in local() or in a 
function, or if it is run at the top level.

For most things on the search list, the binding would be locked, but we 
do allow people to attach environments, and then they'd be on the search 
list, so this code should work too:

   g <- function() {

     attach(environment())

     x <- NULL
     f <- function() x <<- 123
     f()

   }

What shouldn't work would be something like

   mean <<- 3

but it already doesn't work (contrary to the documentation), giving

   Error: cannot change value of locked binding for 'mean'

(which makes sense; what if I locked a binding in the global 
environment?  Then we'd go to the fallback, but the fallback can't work,
because the binding is already there but locked...)

Duncan Murdoch
> 
> -Bill
> 
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 10:54?AM Duncan Murdoch 
> <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com <mailto:murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     I think that should be the default behaviour. It's pretty late to
get
>     that into R 4.3.0, but I think your proposal (with
>     check.superassignment
>     = FALSE being the default) could make it in, and 4.4.0 could change the
>     default to TRUE.
> 
>     Duncan
> 
> 
> 
>     On 19/03/2023 12:08 p.m., Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
>      > I'd like to be able to prevent the <<- assignment
operator ("super
>      > assignment") from assigning to the global environment unless
the
>      > variable already exists and is not locked.? If it does not exist
>     or is
>      > locked, I'd like an error to be produced.? This would allow
me to
>      > evaluate expressions with this temporarily set to protect against
>      > mistakes.
>      >
>      > For example, I'd like to do something like:
>      >
>      > $ R --vanilla
>      >> exists("a")
>      > [1] FALSE
>      >
>      >> options(check.superassignment = TRUE)
>      >> local({ a <<- 1 })
>      > Error: object 'a' not found
>      >
>      >> a <- 0
>      >> local({ a <<- 1 })
>      >> a
>      > [1] 1
>      >
>      >> rm("a")
>      >> options(check.superassignment = FALSE)
>      >> local({ a <<- 1 })
>      >> exists("a")
>      > [1] TRUE
>      >
>      >
>      > BACKGROUND:
>      >
>      >? From help("<<-") we have:
>      >
>      > "The operators <<- and ->> are normally only
used in functions, and
>      > cause a search to be made through parent environments for an
existing
>      > definition of the variable being assigned. If such a variable is
>     found
>      > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined,
>     otherwise
>      > assignment takes place in the global environment."
>      >
>      > I argue that it's unfortunate that <<- fallbacks back
to assigning to
>      > the global environment if the variable does not already exist.
>      > Unfortunately, it has become a "go to" solution for
many to use it
>      > that way.? Sometimes it is intended, sometimes it's a
mistake.? We
>      > find it also in R packages on CRAN, even if 'R CMD check'
tries to
>      > detect when it happens (but it's limited to do so from
run-time
>      > examples and tests).
>      >
>      > It's probably too widely used for us to change to a more
strict
>      > behavior permanent.? The proposed R option allows me, as a
developer,
>      > to evaluate an R expression with the strict behavior, especially
if I
>      > don't trust the code.
>      >
>      > With 'check.superassignment = TRUE' set, a developer
would have to
>      > first declare the variable in the global environment for
<<- to
>     assign
>      > there.? This would remove the fallback "If such a variable
is found
>      > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined,
>     otherwise
>      > assignment takes place in the global environment" in the
current
>      > design.? For those who truly intends to assign to the global,
could
>      > use assign(var, value, envir = globalenv()) or globalenv()[[var]]
<-
>      > value.
>      >
>      > 'R CMD check' could temporarily set
'check.superassignment = TRUE'
>      > during checks.? If we let environment variable
>      > 'R_CHECK_SUPERASSIGNMENT' set the default value of option
>      > 'check.superassignment' on R startup, it would be
possible to check
>      > packages optionally this way, but also to run any
"non-trusted" R
>      > script in the "strict" mode.
>      >
>      >
>      > TEASER:
>      >
>      > Here's an example why using <<- for assigning to the
global
>      > environment is a bad idea:
>      >
>      > This works:
>      >
>      > $ R --vanilla
>      >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
>      >> keep
>      >> [1] 3
>      >
>      >
>      > This doesn't work:
>      >
>      > $ R --vanilla
>      >> library(purrr)
>      >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
>      > Error in keep <<- x : cannot change value of locked binding
for
>     'keep'
>      >
>      >
>      > But, if we "declare" the variable first, it works:
>      >
>      > $ R --vanilla
>      >> library(purrr)
>      >> keep <- 0
>      >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
>      >> keep
>      >> [1] 3
>      >
>      > /Henrik
>      >
>      > PS. Does the <<- operator have an official name? Hadley
calls it
>      > "super assignment" in 'Advanced R'
>      > (https://adv-r.hadley.nz/environments.html
>     <https://adv-r.hadley.nz/environments.html>), which is where I
got it
>      > from.
>      >
>      > ______________________________________________
>      > R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org>
mailing list
>      > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>     <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
> 
>     ______________________________________________
>     R-devel at r-project.org <mailto:R-devel at r-project.org>
mailing list
>     https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>     <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
>

I have to say <<- is a core debugging tool when assigning into the global
environment. I suppose I could use assign but that would be somewhat
annoying.

That said I'm still for this change, the vast overwhelming number of times
that <<- is in my package code - already rare but it does happen - it
would
absolutely be a bug (typo most likely) for it to get to the global
environment and assign into it. Assigning into thr global environment from
package code is a serious anti pattern anyway.

To be honest from the developer perspective what id personally actually
want is an assigner that was willing to go up exactly one frame from the
current one to find its binding. That is how I essentially always am using
<<- myself.

~G

On Sun, Mar 19, 2023, 11:16 AM Bill Dunlap <williamwdunlap at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Why should it make an exception for cases where the about-to-be-assigned-to
> name is present in the global environment?  I think it should warn or give
> an error if the altered variable is in any environment on the search list.
>
> -Bill
>
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 10:54?AM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think that should be the default behaviour. It's pretty late to
get
> > that into R 4.3.0, but I think your proposal (with
check.superassignment
> > = FALSE being the default) could make it in, and 4.4.0 could change
the
> > default to TRUE.
> >
> > Duncan
> >
> >
> >
> > On 19/03/2023 12:08 p.m., Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
> > > I'd like to be able to prevent the <<- assignment
operator ("super
> > > assignment") from assigning to the global environment unless
the
> > > variable already exists and is not locked.  If it does not exist
or is
> > > locked, I'd like an error to be produced.  This would allow
me to
> > > evaluate expressions with this temporarily set to protect against
> > > mistakes.
> > >
> > > For example, I'd like to do something like:
> > >
> > > $ R --vanilla
> > >> exists("a")
> > > [1] FALSE
> > >
> > >> options(check.superassignment = TRUE)
> > >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> > > Error: object 'a' not found
> > >
> > >> a <- 0
> > >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> > >> a
> > > [1] 1
> > >
> > >> rm("a")
> > >> options(check.superassignment = FALSE)
> > >> local({ a <<- 1 })
> > >> exists("a")
> > > [1] TRUE
> > >
> > >
> > > BACKGROUND:
> > >
> > >  From help("<<-") we have:
> > >
> > > "The operators <<- and ->> are normally only
used in functions, and
> > > cause a search to be made through parent environments for an
existing
> > > definition of the variable being assigned. If such a variable is
found
> > > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined,
otherwise
> > > assignment takes place in the global environment."
> > >
> > > I argue that it's unfortunate that <<- fallbacks back
to assigning to
> > > the global environment if the variable does not already exist.
> > > Unfortunately, it has become a "go to" solution for
many to use it
> > > that way.  Sometimes it is intended, sometimes it's a
mistake.  We
> > > find it also in R packages on CRAN, even if 'R CMD check'
tries to
> > > detect when it happens (but it's limited to do so from
run-time
> > > examples and tests).
> > >
> > > It's probably too widely used for us to change to a more
strict
> > > behavior permanent.  The proposed R option allows me, as a
developer,
> > > to evaluate an R expression with the strict behavior, especially
if I
> > > don't trust the code.
> > >
> > > With 'check.superassignment = TRUE' set, a developer
would have to
> > > first declare the variable in the global environment for
<<- to assign
> > > there.  This would remove the fallback "If such a variable
is found
> > > (and its binding is not locked) then its value is redefined,
otherwise
> > > assignment takes place in the global environment" in the
current
> > > design.  For those who truly intends to assign to the global,
could
> > > use assign(var, value, envir = globalenv()) or globalenv()[[var]]
<-
> > > value.
> > >
> > > 'R CMD check' could temporarily set
'check.superassignment = TRUE'
> > > during checks.  If we let environment variable
> > > 'R_CHECK_SUPERASSIGNMENT' set the default value of option
> > > 'check.superassignment' on R startup, it would be
possible to check
> > > packages optionally this way, but also to run any
"non-trusted" R
> > > script in the "strict" mode.
> > >
> > >
> > > TEASER:
> > >
> > > Here's an example why using <<- for assigning to the
global
> > > environment is a bad idea:
> > >
> > > This works:
> > >
> > > $ R --vanilla
> > >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
> > >> keep
> > >> [1] 3
> > >
> > >
> > > This doesn't work:
> > >
> > > $ R --vanilla
> > >> library(purrr)
> > >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
> > > Error in keep <<- x : cannot change value of locked binding
for 'keep'
> > >
> > >
> > > But, if we "declare" the variable first, it works:
> > >
> > > $ R --vanilla
> > >> library(purrr)
> > >> keep <- 0
> > >> y <- lapply(1:3, function(x) { if (x > 2) keep
<<- x; x^2 })
> > >> keep
> > >> [1] 3
> > >
> > > /Henrik
> > >
> > > PS. Does the <<- operator have an official name? Hadley
calls it
> > > "super assignment" in 'Advanced R'
> > > (https://adv-r.hadley.nz/environments.html), which is where I got
it
> > > from.
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]