Ivan Krylov
2025-Feb-06 15:18 UTC
[Rd] Depends: R (>= 4.1) for packages that use |> and \(...)
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 11:16:48 +0100 Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik at wu.ac.at> wrote:> My guess would be that the new syntax is particularly prominently used > in examples: if so, it would be good to also have coverage for this.In today's CRAN snapshot, there turned out to be 198 packages that use 4.1 syntax in examples but not in code, 5 packages that use 4.2 syntax in examples but 4.1 in the code, and 3 packages that use 4.2 syntax in examples but not the code. This may be slightly imprecise because I don't have some of the Rd macro packages installed and run Rd2ex(stages=NULL) on manually-parsed Rd files without installing the packages. Attaching a patch that checks the syntax used in Rd examples at the same time as the main R code, not necessarily the best way to perform this check. Is it perhaps worth separating R/* checks from man/*.Rd checks? Should R CMD check try to reuse the Rd database from the installed copy of the package? -- Best regards, Ivan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: check_R_syntax_in_examples.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 4000 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/attachments/20250206/9fd89fa8/attachment.bin>
Hadley Wickham
2025-Mar-05 13:47 UTC
[Rd] Depends: R (>= 4.1) for packages that use |> and \(...)
Unfortunately your test generates a false positive for httr2 ( https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_httr2.html) and other tidyverse packages where we use the base pipe in examples, but carefully disable them for older versions of R. Hadley On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 9:18?AM Ivan Krylov via R-devel < r-devel at r-project.org> wrote:> On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 11:16:48 +0100 > Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik at wu.ac.at> wrote: > > > My guess would be that the new syntax is particularly prominently used > > in examples: if so, it would be good to also have coverage for this. > > In today's CRAN snapshot, there turned out to be 198 packages that use > 4.1 syntax in examples but not in code, 5 packages that use 4.2 syntax > in examples but 4.1 in the code, and 3 packages that use 4.2 syntax in > examples but not the code. This may be slightly imprecise because I > don't have some of the Rd macro packages installed and run > Rd2ex(stages=NULL) on manually-parsed Rd files without installing the > packages. > > Attaching a patch that checks the syntax used in Rd examples at the > same time as the main R code, not necessarily the best way to perform > this check. Is it perhaps worth separating R/* checks from man/*.Rd > checks? Should R CMD check try to reuse the Rd database from the > installed copy of the package? > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >-- http://hadley.nz [[alternative HTML version deleted]]