From Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch>  Wed Dec  3 15:56:31 1997
From: Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch> (Martin Maechler)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:56:31 +0100
Subject: R-alpha: Re^3: data file names
In-Reply-To: <x27m9m1x6i.fsf@blueberry.kubism.ku.dk> (message from Peter
 Dalgaard BSA on 03 Dec 1997 12:30:13 +0100)
Message-ID: <199712031556.QAA03899@sophie.ethz.ch>

>>>>> "PD" == Peter Dalgaard BSA <p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk> writes:

    PD> Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch> writes:
    >> Yes, why not agree on this, now, even before implementation!
    >> 
    KH> rdf	for R data file/format (data.dump/data.restore)
    >> 
    >> data.dump/data.restore  is hopefully going to be  S-plus compatible as much
    >> as possible (that's why most of us would want it).
    >> Hence, I think the `R' is really too much there.

    PD> I don't think so. The data.dump format is really just an efficient
    PD> encoding of the output of dput/dump.
right!  Actually I never looked at it this way.

    PD> It won't be more compatible than the data structures themselves.

but this will lead to really portable (between S and R) data.dump output
for many cases we want.

    PD> That is, unless someone wants to sit
    PD> down and catalog all the differences in internal data structures and
    PD> do the relevant transformation code....

not really; 
Actually  however, one case we may want to be `compatible' are
factors, since they are part of data.frames.
Factors are somewhat different in R and S
(internally: clear;  in 'dput(.)' -- maybe not necessary).



-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


R-alpha: Re^3: data file names
Martin Maechler