search for: get_if_exists

In November, we had a "bug repository conversation" with Peter Hagerty and myself: https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16065 where the bug report title started with --->> "exists" is a bottleneck for dispatch and package loading, ... Peter proposed an extra simplified and henc faster version of exists(), and I commented > --- Comment #2

...ibility of confusion with S3 > methods, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a > little strange. > > If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I > think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use > get_if_exists. > > Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an > optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not > parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). > > Duncan Murdoch > > > > My version of...

...ut there's still the possibility of confusion with S3 methods, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a little strange. If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use get_if_exists. Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). Duncan Murdoch > My version of the help file {for both exists() and get...

...ibility of confusion with S3 > methods, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a > little strange. > > If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I > think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use > get_if_exists. > > Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an > optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not > parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). > > Duncan Murdoch > > > > My version of...

...h S3 >> methods, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a >> little strange. >> >> If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I >> think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use >> get_if_exists. >> >> Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an >> optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not >> parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). >> >> Duncan Murdoch >>...

...possibility of confusion with S3 > methods, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a > little strange. > If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I > think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use > get_if_exists. > Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an > optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not > parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). > Duncan Murdoch > > My version of the help file {...

...s, and users of other languages where "." is an operator find it a >>> little strange. >>> >>> If you don't like lowerCamelCase (and a lot of people don't), then I >>> think underscore_separated is the next best choice, so would use >>> get_if_exists. >>> >>> Another possibility is to make no new name at all, and just add an >>> optional parameter to get() (which if present acts as your value.if.not >>> parameter, if not present keeps the current "object not found" error). >>> >>>...