From b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk  Fri Feb 12 16:33:18 2010
From: b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk (Barry Rowlingson)
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:33:18 +0000
Subject: [Rd] R Startup configuration file
In-Reply-To: <0D56D7F5-1509-4296-A8FA-637DB08E221D@r-project.org>
References: <d8ad40b51002100123s4b1d77bmc27ece9686106ef@mail.gmail.com>
	<4B729C0F.3030301@stats.uwo.ca>
	<d8ad40b51002100706t5869535av162a43a6362d6c6b@mail.gmail.com>
	<d8ad40b51002120050o74e12ad2pb0423c8017f90350@mail.gmail.com>
	<0D56D7F5-1509-4296-A8FA-637DB08E221D@r-project.org>
Message-ID: <d8ad40b51002120733n623f55abo310d04b7eec6d500@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Simon Urbanek
<simon.urbanek at r-project.org> wrote:

> This is getting OT, but, please, no XML. It's entirely useless in this
> context IMHO (as it is in others, but that's another story) and we already
> have reliable support for storing R objects (more than one in fact). Despite
> the fact that some used to claim human readability of XML in practice it
> turns out to be false, so I don't see any real benefits of XML in this
> context.

 Yes, I agree. Originally I was hoping to have a nice
human-and-computer readable config.ini file:

[options]
contrasts = structure(list(contrasts = structure(c("contr.treatment",
"contr.poly"
), .Names = c("unordered", "ordered"))), .Names = "contrasts")

but the lack of an ini parser in R made me think "heck, let's do it in
something we do have a parser for...".

maybe I should use JSON? Yeah, we have a parser and that's what all
the hipster web 3.0 kids are using these days....

Barry

-- 
blog: http://geospaced.blogspot.com/
web: http://www.maths.lancs.ac.uk/~rowlings
web: http://www.rowlingson.com/
twitter: http://twitter.com/geospacedman
pics: http://www.flickr.com/photos/spacedman



[Rd] R Startup configuration file
Barry Rowlingson