search for: r79434

I noticed the recent commit to R-dev (r79434). Is this wise? I've often used get() in constructions like for (j in ls()) if (is.numeric(x <- get(j))) ... (and often interactively, rather than in a package) Am I to understand that get(j) will now be equivalent to `j` even if j is a string referring putatively to another object? On...

...including, I think, in > package code (though pretty infrequently). > Perhaps a character.only argument similar to library? > > ~G > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 5:31 PM Hugh Parsonage <hugh.parsonage at gmail.com> > wrote: > I noticed the recent commit to R-dev (r79434).? Is this wise? > I've > often used get() in constructions like > > for (j in ls()) if (is.numeric(x <- get(j))) ... > > (and often interactively, rather than in a package) > > Am I to understand that get(j) will now be equivalent to `j`...

...d variable values in get() as well, and including, I think, in package code (though pretty infrequently). Perhaps a character.only argument similar to library? ~G On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 5:31 PM Hugh Parsonage <hugh.parsonage at gmail.com> wrote: > I noticed the recent commit to R-dev (r79434). Is this wise? I've > often used get() in constructions like > > for (j in ls()) if (is.numeric(x <- get(j))) ... > > (and often interactively, rather than in a package) > > Am I to understand that get(j) will now be equivalent to `j` even if j > is a string referri...

Dear R-devel, The doc of exists, get and get0 is unambiguous, x should be an object given as a character string. However these accept longer inputs. It can lead an uncareful user to think these functions are vectorized when they're not, and generally lets through bugs that one might have preferred to trigger earlier failure. ``` r exists("d") #> [1] FALSE exists(c("c",