From h.wickham at gmail.com  Tue May 19 23:38:19 2009
From: h.wickham at gmail.com (hadley wickham)
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 14:38:19 -0700
Subject: [Rd] Qs: The list of arguments, wrapping functions...
In-Reply-To: <c2350ba40905191322y2bffbfdu79f4cb480732252e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c2350ba40905191322y2bffbfdu79f4cb480732252e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f8e6ff050905191438o19d7f9afr67a0dd3ccd41e935@mail.gmail.com>

> 1. Is there a way for a function to refer generically to all its actual
> arguments as a list? ?I'm thinking of something like the @_ array in Perl or
> the arguments variable in JavaScript. ?(By "actual" I mean the ones that
> were actually passed, as opposed to its formal arguments, as returned by
> formals()).

match.call ?

Hadley

-- 
http://had.co.nz/



[Rd] Qs: The list of arguments, wrapping functions...
hadley wickham