From dmurdoch at pair.com  Fri Jan 16 12:07:07 2004
From: dmurdoch at pair.com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Fri Jan 16 12:05:43 2004
Subject: [Rd] local variables (PR#6436)
In-Reply-To: <20040116101231.65936104B9@slim.kubism.ku.dk>
References: <20040116101231.65936104B9@slim.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <hsgf0053f3jsq39aa4t2l5k80cc2uht0ga@4ax.com>

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:12:31 +0100 (CET), you wrote:

>It seems that R (unlike S-plus) allows assignments to elements of a 
>vector objects even when the object do not exists locally (inside a 
>fucntion) in cases where an object of the same name exists globally.  I 
>guess this is not really desired behaviour:

Please don't post things as bugs unless you're reasonably sure they're
bugs.  This is a difference between R and S-PLUS.

It's well documented that R and S-PLUS have different scoping rules
(see 3.3.1"Lexical Scoping" in the FAQ), but I don't think that's
coming into play here.  

What we have is a reference to a global variable that modifies it.
For some reason S-PLUS doesn't allow that, but R does.  Why do you
think it's a bug in R?

Duncan Murdoch


[Rd] local variables (PR#6436)
Duncan Murdoch