The "--slave" option

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Benjamin Lang-2
Hi Abby,

I don’t really understand why you’re upset with me, but a) they’re cultured cell lines, not animals, b) they might cure people, c) I don’t do experiments, d) modern slavery, dated today: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/21/such-brutality-tricked-into-slavery-in-the-thai-fishing-industry .

I simply don’t like the word, and it doesn’t even describe what the option does.

Best,
Ben

> On 22 Sep 2019, at 00:56, Abby Spurdle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> (excerpts only)
>> slavery being easily justified by the Bible while abolition is not is an experience.
>> P.S. Do any R developers actually read this?
>
> I've read one or two verses...
>
> I also found this (by you):
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20362542
>
> Which uses embryonic stem cells.
> I recognize that they're mouse embryos.
> However, your article cites at least five other articles (probably, a
> lot more), that use human embryonic stem cells.
>
> You complain about slavery (that doesn't exist), and then prompte
> murder (which does exist).
> What does that say about you...
>
> And that's ignoring the way you treat animals
> We slice and dice data, you slice and dice living creatures.
>
> Here's two songs about freedom, if you have ears to hear:
> https://youtu.be/lKw6uqtGFfo
> https://youtu.be/HAIdo707Sac

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

R help mailing list-2
In reply to this post by Abby Spurdle
Please All:

While as I said in my first post I am still not convinced that the OP was in good faith to improve R and not a troll  (yours to decide), I also don't think attacking a person's research to counter a point that has nothing to do with their research is what is wanted on this mail-list.  There is one very simple alternative - don't reply.

Ben - members of R-core do read this mail-list,  and the fact that not a single one has replied probably tells you what you need to know.

-Roy


> On Sep 21, 2019, at 3:56 PM, Abby Spurdle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> (excerpts only)
>> slavery being easily justified by the Bible while abolition is not is an experience.
>> P.S. Do any R developers actually read this?
>
> I've read one or two verses...
>
> I also found this (by you):
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20362542
>
> Which uses embryonic stem cells.
> I recognize that they're mouse embryos.
> However, your article cites at least five other articles (probably, a
> lot more), that use human embryonic stem cells.
>
> You complain about slavery (that doesn't exist), and then prompte
> murder (which does exist).
> What does that say about you...
>
> And that's ignoring the way you treat animals
> We slice and dice data, you slice and dice living creatures.
>
> Here's two songs about freedom, if you have ears to hear:
> https://youtu.be/lKw6uqtGFfo
> https://youtu.be/HAIdo707Sac

**********************
"The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA."
**********************
Roy Mendelssohn
Supervisory Operations Research Analyst
NOAA/NMFS
Environmental Research Division
Southwest Fisheries Science Center
***Note new street address***
110 McAllister Way
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: (831)-420-3666
Fax: (831) 420-3980
e-mail: [hidden email] www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/

"Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill."
"From those who have been given much, much will be expected"
"the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr.

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Benjamin Lang-2
Hah, fair. I do hope somebody does see it and gives it a thought.

Thanks,
Ben

On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 at 01:29, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Please All:
>
> While as I said in my first post I am still not convinced that the OP was
> in good faith to improve R and not a troll  (yours to decide), I also don't
> think attacking a person's research to counter a point that has nothing to
> do with their research is what is wanted on this mail-list.  There is one
> very simple alternative - don't reply.
>
> Ben - members of R-core do read this mail-list,  and the fact that not a
> single one has replied probably tells you what you need to know.
>
> -Roy
>
>
> > On Sep 21, 2019, at 3:56 PM, Abby Spurdle <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > (excerpts only)
> >> slavery being easily justified by the Bible while abolition is not is
> an experience.
> >> P.S. Do any R developers actually read this?
> >
> > I've read one or two verses...
> >
> > I also found this (by you):
> > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20362542
> >
> > Which uses embryonic stem cells.
> > I recognize that they're mouse embryos.
> > However, your article cites at least five other articles (probably, a
> > lot more), that use human embryonic stem cells.
> >
> > You complain about slavery (that doesn't exist), and then prompte
> > murder (which does exist).
> > What does that say about you...
> >
> > And that's ignoring the way you treat animals
> > We slice and dice data, you slice and dice living creatures.
> >
> > Here's two songs about freedom, if you have ears to hear:
> > https://youtu.be/lKw6uqtGFfo
> > https://youtu.be/HAIdo707Sac
>
> **********************
> "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S.
> Government or NOAA."
> **********************
> Roy Mendelssohn
> Supervisory Operations Research Analyst
> NOAA/NMFS
> Environmental Research Division
> Southwest Fisheries Science Center
> ***Note new street address***
> 110 McAllister Way
> Santa Cruz, CA 95060
> Phone: (831)-420-3666
> Fax: (831) 420-3980
> e-mail: [hidden email] www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/
>
> "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill."
> "From those who have been given much, much will be expected"
> "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK
> Jr.
>
>

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Benoit Vaillant
In reply to this post by R help mailing list-2
Hello Roy,

On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 04:29:16PM -0700, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-help wrote:
> don't reply.

While I could refrain from doing it up to now, these single words are
urging me to do so :)

On a personnal side I agree with you that (even public) research
should not be used to address the issue. R-help is far from needing to
kick low. We can do a lot better.

Here are a few of my thoughts I had while reading the thread:
 - the quiet option: already pointed out, won't expand
 - « Iron Maiden - Powerslave » (yes I listen to this kind of music):
   well, should the band rename itself, change the album title? :)
 - a more serious one, sometimes I use netstat. definitely not every
   day. So I need a way to remember the options, it's -taupe (in
   french, it means "mole", which does exactly what I want to do:
   dig). Remove the a, switch consonants and it becomes an other
   french word (translation: slut). Should we also ban short options
   that enables one to make such a reminder?
 - a bit of unix "porn":
     $ unzip; strip; touch; finger; grep; mount; fsck; more; yes; fsck; fsck; umount; clean; sleep
   If you see a message here, you are in trouble, these are only unix
   commands.

That's all!

--
Benoît

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

signature.asc (883 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Tobias Fellinger
In reply to this post by Richard O'Keefe-2
Hello everyone,

I think Richard's proposal to update the documentation is a good idea. Not
only because it puts the phrasing into context but also because it makes
the documentation clearer.

About the initial mail: I think the awareness for language has increased a
lot in the recent years and I think this is overall a good thing. New code
should consider this from the beginning on and in old code should be
changed where it is possible, particularly the documentation. General
terminology like master/slave is hard to replace but there are alternative
wordings that are less offensive and as clear if not clearer.

A few thoughts on whether this should be discussed, or if this is the right
place for this discussion.

To get changes in the code or the documentation done, the help mailing list
is definitely not the best place. But discussing the topic does have some
merit, also if it's only very loosely related to the topic of the mailing-
list. Changing the name of one commandline option will not change society
but having a discussion about phrasing, naming or jokes in documentation
and comments in the code is valuable, even if just to establish a certain
awareness. Whether the original poster is a troll or not does not change
much about this, there are more participants in this conversation than the
op.

I think this discussion could be had much less cynical. Assuming without
reason that anyone acts in bad faith in starting the discussion or arguing
for either side does not help. I also think discussing this separately for
each comment and each commandline option is not the best way to do this.
But the fact, that discussions like this resurface every few years in many
open-source communities shows, that there are concerns here. I think
dismissing completely or belittling these concerns unnecessarily alienates
a (maybe small, maybe larger than it appears) group in the community.

kind regards, Tobias

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

Abby Spurdle
In reply to this post by R help mailing list-2
> I also don't think attacking a person's research to counter a point that has nothing to do with their research is what is wanted on this mail-list.

You're right.
I may take a break from these mailing lists, for a while...

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option

Martin Maechler
In reply to this post by Richard O'Keefe-2
>>>>> Richard O'Keefe
>>>>>     on Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:39:18 +1200 writes:

    > Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something
    > that *can* be done that's genuinely helpful.
    >> From the R(1) manual page:
    >        -q, --quiet Don't print startup message

    >        --silent Same as --quiet

    >        --slave Make R run as quietly as possible

    > It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of
    > --quiet.  So perhaps

    >     -q, --quiet Don't print the startup message.  This is
    > the only output that is suppressed.

    >     --silent Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup
    > message only.

    >     --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is
    > for use when running R as a subordinate process.  See
    > "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
    > https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
    > for an example.

Thank you, Stephen and Richard.

I think we (the R Core Team) *can* make the description a bit
more verbose. However, as practically all "--<foo>" descriptions
are fitting in one short line, (and as the 'subprocess' package is just an
extension pkg, and may disappear (and more reasons)) I'd like to
be less verbose than your proposal.

What about

  -q, --quiet Don't print startup message

  --silent Same as --quiet

  --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  For use when
  runnning R as sub(ordinate) process.

If you look more closely, you'll notice that --slave is not much
quieter than --quiet, the only (?) difference being that the
input is not copied and (only "mostly") the R prompt is also not printed.

And from my experiments (in Linux (Fedora 30)), one might even
notice that in some cases --slave prints the R prompt (to stderr?)
which one might consider bogous (I'm not: not wanting to spend
time fixing this platform-independently) :

    --slave :
------------------------

MM@lynne$ echo '(i <- 1:3)
i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla
> [1] 1 2 3
[1] 10 20 30
MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rslave.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla | tee $f
> [1] 1 2 3
[1] 10 20 30
MM@lynne$ cat $f
[1] 1 2 3
[1] 10 20 30

    --quiet :
------------------------

MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rquiet.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
i*10' | R-3.6.1 --quiet --vanilla | tee $f
> (i <- 1:3)
[1] 1 2 3
> i*10
[1] 10 20 30
>
MM@lynne$ cat $f
> (i <- 1:3)
[1] 1 2 3
> i*10
[1] 10 20 30
>
MM@lynne$

------------------------

But there's a bit more to it: In my examples above, both --quiet
and --slave where used together with --vanilla.  In general
--slave *also* never saves, i.e., uses the equivalent of
q('no'), where as --quiet does [ask or ...].

Last but not least, from very simply reading R's source code on
this, it becomes blatant that you can use  '-s'  instead of '--slave',
but we (R Core) have probably not documented that on purpose (so
we could reserve it for something more important, and redefine
the simple use of '-s' some time in the future ?)

So, all those who want to restrict their language could use '-s'
for now.  In addition, we could add  >> one <<  other alias to
--slave, say --subprocess (or --quieter ? or ???)
and one could make that the preferred use some time in the future.

Well, these were another two hours of time *not* spent improving
R technically, but spent reading e-mails, source code, and considering.
Maybe well spent, maybe not ...

Martin Maechler
ETH Zurich and R Core Team




    > On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 02:29, Stephen Ellison
    > <[hidden email]> wrote:
    >>
    >> > Sure, it's a silly example, but it makes about as much
    >> sense as using > "slave" to mean "quiet".  It
    >> doesn't. It's a set of options chosen for when R is
    >> called as a slave process from a controlling process, and
    >> in that it is a reasonable description of the
    >> circumstance.
    >>
    >> --quiet is a separate command line option with different
    >> effect.
    >>
    >>

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

Martin Maechler
>>>>> Martin Maechler
>>>>>     on Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:14:36 +0200 writes:

>>>>> Richard O'Keefe
>>>>>     on Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:39:18 +1200 writes:

    >> Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something
    >> that *can* be done that's genuinely helpful.
    >>> From the R(1) manual page:
    >> -q, --quiet Don't print startup message

    >> --silent Same as --quiet

    >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible

    >> It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of
    >> --quiet.  So perhaps

    >> -q, --quiet Don't print the startup message.  This is
    >> the only output that is suppressed.

    >> --silent Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup
    >> message only.

    >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is
    >> for use when running R as a subordinate process.  See
    >> "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
    >> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
    >> for an example.

    > Thank you, Stephen and Richard.

    > I think we (the R Core Team) *can* make the description a bit
    > more verbose. However, as practically all "--<foo>" descriptions
    > are fitting in one short line, (and as the 'subprocess' package is just an
    > extension pkg, and may disappear (and more reasons)) I'd like to
    > be less verbose than your proposal.

    > What about

    > -q, --quiet Don't print startup message

    > --silent Same as --quiet

    > --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  For use when
    > runnning R as sub(ordinate) process.

    > If you look more closely, you'll notice that --slave is not much
    > quieter than --quiet, the only (?) difference being that the
    > input is not copied and (only "mostly") the R prompt is also not printed.

    > And from my experiments (in Linux (Fedora 30)), one might even
    > notice that in some cases --slave prints the R prompt (to stderr?)
    > which one might consider bogous (I'm not: not wanting to spend
    > time fixing this platform-independently) :

    > --slave :
    > ------------------------

    > MM@lynne$ echo '(i <- 1:3)
    > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla
    >> [1] 1 2 3
    > [1] 10 20 30
    > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rslave.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
    > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla | tee $f
    >> [1] 1 2 3
    > [1] 10 20 30
    > MM@lynne$ cat $f
    > [1] 1 2 3
    > [1] 10 20 30

    > --quiet :
    > ------------------------

    > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rquiet.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
    > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --quiet --vanilla | tee $f
    >> (i <- 1:3)
    > [1] 1 2 3
    >> i*10
    > [1] 10 20 30
    >>
    > MM@lynne$ cat $f
    >> (i <- 1:3)
    > [1] 1 2 3
    >> i*10
    > [1] 10 20 30
    >>
    > MM@lynne$

    > ------------------------

    > But there's a bit more to it: In my examples above, both --quiet
    > and --slave where used together with --vanilla.  In general
    > --slave *also* never saves, i.e., uses the equivalent of
    > q('no'), where as --quiet does [ask or ...].

    > Last but not least, from very simply reading R's source code on
    > this, it becomes blatant that you can use  '-s'  instead of '--slave',
    > but we (R Core) have probably not documented that on purpose (so
    > we could reserve it for something more important, and redefine
    > the simple use of '-s' some time in the future ?)

    > So, all those who want to restrict their language could use '-s'
    > for now.  In addition, we could add  >> one <<  other alias to
    > --slave, say --subprocess (or --quieter ? or ???)
    > and one could make that the preferred use some time in the future.

    > Well, these were another two hours of time *not* spent improving
    > R technically, but spent reading e-mails, source code, and considering.
    > Maybe well spent, maybe not ...

    > Martin Maechler
    > ETH Zurich and R Core Team

With in the   R Core Team    we have considered the issue.

As a consequence, I have committed a few minutes ago code changes
that replace '--slave' by '--no-echo' .
[This will be in R-devel versions from svn rev 77229 and of
 course in the "big step" release around April 2020].
 
Among other considerations, we found that  '--no-echo' was
really much more self-explaining, as indeed the command line
option turns off the echo'ing of the R code that is executed,
and on the C level is indeed very much related to R level

    options(echo = "no")

For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
it, will not stop working.


Best regards,
Martin Maechler
ETH Zurich and R Core Team

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

Jim Lemon-4
On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:04 AM Martin Maechler
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
> continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
> it, will not stop working.
>
That's a relief. I was getting worried that we would become:

The knights who cannot say BS.

Jim

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

R help mailing list-2
In reply to this post by Martin Maechler
Hi Martin,

'--no-echo'

....or....

'--no_echo'

Obviously you may prefer the first, but I hope you might consider the second.

Best Regards,

W. Michels, Ph.D.


On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:04 AM Martin Maechler
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> >>>>> Martin Maechler
> >>>>>     on Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:14:36 +0200 writes:
>
> >>>>> Richard O'Keefe
> >>>>>     on Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:39:18 +1200 writes:
>
>     >> Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something
>     >> that *can* be done that's genuinely helpful.
>     >>> From the R(1) manual page:
>     >> -q, --quiet Don't print startup message
>
>     >> --silent Same as --quiet
>
>     >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible
>
>     >> It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of
>     >> --quiet.  So perhaps
>
>     >> -q, --quiet Don't print the startup message.  This is
>     >> the only output that is suppressed.
>
>     >> --silent Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup
>     >> message only.
>
>     >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is
>     >> for use when running R as a subordinate process.  See
>     >> "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
>     >> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
>     >> for an example.
>
>     > Thank you, Stephen and Richard.
>
>     > I think we (the R Core Team) *can* make the description a bit
>     > more verbose. However, as practically all "--<foo>" descriptions
>     > are fitting in one short line, (and as the 'subprocess' package is just an
>     > extension pkg, and may disappear (and more reasons)) I'd like to
>     > be less verbose than your proposal.
>
>     > What about
>
>     > -q, --quiet               Don't print startup message
>
>     > --silent          Same as --quiet
>
>     > --slave           Make R run as quietly as possible.  For use when
>     > runnning R as sub(ordinate) process.
>
>     > If you look more closely, you'll notice that --slave is not much
>     > quieter than --quiet, the only (?) difference being that the
>     > input is not copied and (only "mostly") the R prompt is also not printed.
>
>     > And from my experiments (in Linux (Fedora 30)), one might even
>     > notice that in some cases --slave prints the R prompt (to stderr?)
>     > which one might consider bogous (I'm not: not wanting to spend
>     > time fixing this platform-independently) :
>
>     > --slave :
>     > ------------------------
>
>     > MM@lynne$ echo '(i <- 1:3)
>     > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla
>     >> [1] 1 2 3
>     > [1] 10 20 30
>     > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rslave.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
>     > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla | tee $f
>     >> [1] 1 2 3
>     > [1] 10 20 30
>     > MM@lynne$ cat $f
>     > [1] 1 2 3
>     > [1] 10 20 30
>
>     > --quiet :
>     > ------------------------
>
>     > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rquiet.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
>     > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --quiet --vanilla | tee $f
>     >> (i <- 1:3)
>     > [1] 1 2 3
>     >> i*10
>     > [1] 10 20 30
>     >>
>     > MM@lynne$ cat $f
>     >> (i <- 1:3)
>     > [1] 1 2 3
>     >> i*10
>     > [1] 10 20 30
>     >>
>     > MM@lynne$
>
>     > ------------------------
>
>     > But there's a bit more to it: In my examples above, both --quiet
>     > and --slave where used together with --vanilla.  In general
>     > --slave *also* never saves, i.e., uses the equivalent of
>     > q('no'), where as --quiet does [ask or ...].
>
>     > Last but not least, from very simply reading R's source code on
>     > this, it becomes blatant that you can use  '-s'  instead of '--slave',
>     > but we (R Core) have probably not documented that on purpose (so
>     > we could reserve it for something more important, and redefine
>     > the simple use of '-s' some time in the future ?)
>
>     > So, all those who want to restrict their language could use '-s'
>     > for now.  In addition, we could add  >> one <<  other alias to
>     > --slave, say --subprocess (or --quieter ? or ???)
>     > and one could make that the preferred use some time in the future.
>
>     > Well, these were another two hours of time *not* spent improving
>     > R technically, but spent reading e-mails, source code, and considering.
>     > Maybe well spent, maybe not ...
>
>     > Martin Maechler
>     > ETH Zurich and R Core Team
>
> With in the   R Core Team    we have considered the issue.
>
> As a consequence, I have committed a few minutes ago code changes
> that replace '--slave' by '--no-echo' .
> [This will be in R-devel versions from svn rev 77229 and of
>  course in the "big step" release around April 2020].
>
> Among other considerations, we found that  '--no-echo' was
> really much more self-explaining, as indeed the command line
> option turns off the echo'ing of the R code that is executed,
> and on the C level is indeed very much related to R level
>
>     options(echo = "no")
>
> For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
> continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
> it, will not stop working.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Martin Maechler
> ETH Zurich and R Core Team
>
> ______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

Duncan Murdoch-2
On 27/09/2019 5:36 p.m., William Michels via R-help wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> '--no-echo'
>
> ....or....
>
> '--no_echo'
>
> Obviously you may prefer the first, but I hope you might consider the second.

Are you serious?  That's a terrible suggestion.  Run "R --help" and
you'll see *no* options with underscores, and a dozen with embedded hyphens.

Duncan Murdoch

>
> Best Regards,
>
> W. Michels, Ph.D.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:04 AM Martin Maechler
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Martin Maechler
>>>>>>>      on Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:14:36 +0200 writes:
>>
>>>>>>> Richard O'Keefe
>>>>>>>      on Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:39:18 +1200 writes:
>>
>>      >> Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something
>>      >> that *can* be done that's genuinely helpful.
>>      >>> From the R(1) manual page:
>>      >> -q, --quiet Don't print startup message
>>
>>      >> --silent Same as --quiet
>>
>>      >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible
>>
>>      >> It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of
>>      >> --quiet.  So perhaps
>>
>>      >> -q, --quiet Don't print the startup message.  This is
>>      >> the only output that is suppressed.
>>
>>      >> --silent Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup
>>      >> message only.
>>
>>      >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is
>>      >> for use when running R as a subordinate process.  See
>>      >> "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
>>      >> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
>>      >> for an example.
>>
>>      > Thank you, Stephen and Richard.
>>
>>      > I think we (the R Core Team) *can* make the description a bit
>>      > more verbose. However, as practically all "--<foo>" descriptions
>>      > are fitting in one short line, (and as the 'subprocess' package is just an
>>      > extension pkg, and may disappear (and more reasons)) I'd like to
>>      > be less verbose than your proposal.
>>
>>      > What about
>>
>>      > -q, --quiet               Don't print startup message
>>
>>      > --silent          Same as --quiet
>>
>>      > --slave           Make R run as quietly as possible.  For use when
>>      > runnning R as sub(ordinate) process.
>>
>>      > If you look more closely, you'll notice that --slave is not much
>>      > quieter than --quiet, the only (?) difference being that the
>>      > input is not copied and (only "mostly") the R prompt is also not printed.
>>
>>      > And from my experiments (in Linux (Fedora 30)), one might even
>>      > notice that in some cases --slave prints the R prompt (to stderr?)
>>      > which one might consider bogous (I'm not: not wanting to spend
>>      > time fixing this platform-independently) :
>>
>>      > --slave :
>>      > ------------------------
>>
>>      > MM@lynne$ echo '(i <- 1:3)
>>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla
>>      >> [1] 1 2 3
>>      > [1] 10 20 30
>>      > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rslave.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
>>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla | tee $f
>>      >> [1] 1 2 3
>>      > [1] 10 20 30
>>      > MM@lynne$ cat $f
>>      > [1] 1 2 3
>>      > [1] 10 20 30
>>
>>      > --quiet :
>>      > ------------------------
>>
>>      > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rquiet.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
>>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --quiet --vanilla | tee $f
>>      >> (i <- 1:3)
>>      > [1] 1 2 3
>>      >> i*10
>>      > [1] 10 20 30
>>      >>
>>      > MM@lynne$ cat $f
>>      >> (i <- 1:3)
>>      > [1] 1 2 3
>>      >> i*10
>>      > [1] 10 20 30
>>      >>
>>      > MM@lynne$
>>
>>      > ------------------------
>>
>>      > But there's a bit more to it: In my examples above, both --quiet
>>      > and --slave where used together with --vanilla.  In general
>>      > --slave *also* never saves, i.e., uses the equivalent of
>>      > q('no'), where as --quiet does [ask or ...].
>>
>>      > Last but not least, from very simply reading R's source code on
>>      > this, it becomes blatant that you can use  '-s'  instead of '--slave',
>>      > but we (R Core) have probably not documented that on purpose (so
>>      > we could reserve it for something more important, and redefine
>>      > the simple use of '-s' some time in the future ?)
>>
>>      > So, all those who want to restrict their language could use '-s'
>>      > for now.  In addition, we could add  >> one <<  other alias to
>>      > --slave, say --subprocess (or --quieter ? or ???)
>>      > and one could make that the preferred use some time in the future.
>>
>>      > Well, these were another two hours of time *not* spent improving
>>      > R technically, but spent reading e-mails, source code, and considering.
>>      > Maybe well spent, maybe not ...
>>
>>      > Martin Maechler
>>      > ETH Zurich and R Core Team
>>
>> With in the   R Core Team    we have considered the issue.
>>
>> As a consequence, I have committed a few minutes ago code changes
>> that replace '--slave' by '--no-echo' .
>> [This will be in R-devel versions from svn rev 77229 and of
>>   course in the "big step" release around April 2020].
>>
>> Among other considerations, we found that  '--no-echo' was
>> really much more self-explaining, as indeed the command line
>> option turns off the echo'ing of the R code that is executed,
>> and on the C level is indeed very much related to R level
>>
>>      options(echo = "no")
>>
>> For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
>> continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
>> it, will not stop working.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Martin Maechler
>> ETH Zurich and R Core Team
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> [hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>
> ______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

R help mailing list-2
Apologies, Duncan and Martin. I didn't check "R --help" first. You're
quite right, lots of embedded hyphens.

Best Regards, Bill.

W. Michels, Ph.D.

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 2:42 PM Duncan Murdoch <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 27/09/2019 5:36 p.m., William Michels via R-help wrote:
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > '--no-echo'
> >
> > ....or....
> >
> > '--no_echo'
> >
> > Obviously you may prefer the first, but I hope you might consider the second.
>
> Are you serious?  That's a terrible suggestion.  Run "R --help" and
> you'll see *no* options with underscores, and a dozen with embedded hyphens.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > W. Michels, Ph.D.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:04 AM Martin Maechler
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>> Martin Maechler
> >>>>>>>      on Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:14:36 +0200 writes:
> >>
> >>>>>>> Richard O'Keefe
> >>>>>>>      on Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:39:18 +1200 writes:
> >>
> >>      >> Ah, *now* we're getting somewhere.  There is something
> >>      >> that *can* be done that's genuinely helpful.
> >>      >>> From the R(1) manual page:
> >>      >> -q, --quiet Don't print startup message
> >>
> >>      >> --silent Same as --quiet
> >>
> >>      >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible
> >>
> >>      >> It might have been better to use --nobanner instead of
> >>      >> --quiet.  So perhaps
> >>
> >>      >> -q, --quiet Don't print the startup message.  This is
> >>      >> the only output that is suppressed.
> >>
> >>      >> --silent Same as --quiet.  Suppress the startup
> >>      >> message only.
> >>
> >>      >> --slave Make R run as quietly as possible.  This is
> >>      >> for use when running R as a subordinate process.  See
> >>      >> "Introduction to Sub-Processes in R"
> >>      >> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/subprocess/vignettes/intro.html
> >>      >> for an example.
> >>
> >>      > Thank you, Stephen and Richard.
> >>
> >>      > I think we (the R Core Team) *can* make the description a bit
> >>      > more verbose. However, as practically all "--<foo>" descriptions
> >>      > are fitting in one short line, (and as the 'subprocess' package is just an
> >>      > extension pkg, and may disappear (and more reasons)) I'd like to
> >>      > be less verbose than your proposal.
> >>
> >>      > What about
> >>
> >>      > -q, --quiet               Don't print startup message
> >>
> >>      > --silent          Same as --quiet
> >>
> >>      > --slave           Make R run as quietly as possible.  For use when
> >>      > runnning R as sub(ordinate) process.
> >>
> >>      > If you look more closely, you'll notice that --slave is not much
> >>      > quieter than --quiet, the only (?) difference being that the
> >>      > input is not copied and (only "mostly") the R prompt is also not printed.
> >>
> >>      > And from my experiments (in Linux (Fedora 30)), one might even
> >>      > notice that in some cases --slave prints the R prompt (to stderr?)
> >>      > which one might consider bogous (I'm not: not wanting to spend
> >>      > time fixing this platform-independently) :
> >>
> >>      > --slave :
> >>      > ------------------------
> >>
> >>      > MM@lynne$ echo '(i <- 1:3)
> >>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla
> >>      >> [1] 1 2 3
> >>      > [1] 10 20 30
> >>      > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rslave.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
> >>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --slave --vanilla | tee $f
> >>      >> [1] 1 2 3
> >>      > [1] 10 20 30
> >>      > MM@lynne$ cat $f
> >>      > [1] 1 2 3
> >>      > [1] 10 20 30
> >>
> >>      > --quiet :
> >>      > ------------------------
> >>
> >>      > MM@lynne$ f=/tmp/Rquiet.out$$; echo '(i <- 1:3)
> >>      > i*10' | R-3.6.1 --quiet --vanilla | tee $f
> >>      >> (i <- 1:3)
> >>      > [1] 1 2 3
> >>      >> i*10
> >>      > [1] 10 20 30
> >>      >>
> >>      > MM@lynne$ cat $f
> >>      >> (i <- 1:3)
> >>      > [1] 1 2 3
> >>      >> i*10
> >>      > [1] 10 20 30
> >>      >>
> >>      > MM@lynne$
> >>
> >>      > ------------------------
> >>
> >>      > But there's a bit more to it: In my examples above, both --quiet
> >>      > and --slave where used together with --vanilla.  In general
> >>      > --slave *also* never saves, i.e., uses the equivalent of
> >>      > q('no'), where as --quiet does [ask or ...].
> >>
> >>      > Last but not least, from very simply reading R's source code on
> >>      > this, it becomes blatant that you can use  '-s'  instead of '--slave',
> >>      > but we (R Core) have probably not documented that on purpose (so
> >>      > we could reserve it for something more important, and redefine
> >>      > the simple use of '-s' some time in the future ?)
> >>
> >>      > So, all those who want to restrict their language could use '-s'
> >>      > for now.  In addition, we could add  >> one <<  other alias to
> >>      > --slave, say --subprocess (or --quieter ? or ???)
> >>      > and one could make that the preferred use some time in the future.
> >>
> >>      > Well, these were another two hours of time *not* spent improving
> >>      > R technically, but spent reading e-mails, source code, and considering.
> >>      > Maybe well spent, maybe not ...
> >>
> >>      > Martin Maechler
> >>      > ETH Zurich and R Core Team
> >>
> >> With in the   R Core Team    we have considered the issue.
> >>
> >> As a consequence, I have committed a few minutes ago code changes
> >> that replace '--slave' by '--no-echo' .
> >> [This will be in R-devel versions from svn rev 77229 and of
> >>   course in the "big step" release around April 2020].
> >>
> >> Among other considerations, we found that  '--no-echo' was
> >> really much more self-explaining, as indeed the command line
> >> option turns off the echo'ing of the R code that is executed,
> >> and on the C level is indeed very much related to R level
> >>
> >>      options(echo = "no")
> >>
> >> For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
> >> continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
> >> it, will not stop working.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Martin Maechler
> >> ETH Zurich and R Core Team
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> [hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> >> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> >> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > [hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
> >
>

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [FORGED] Re: The "--slave" option ==> will become "--no-echo"

Rolf Turner
In reply to this post by Jim Lemon-4

On 28/09/19 9:16 AM, Jim Lemon wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:04 AM Martin Maechler
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> For back compatibility reasons, the old command line option will
>> continue to work so the many shell and other scripts that use
>> it, will not stop working.
>>
> That's a relief. I was getting worried that we would become:
>
> The knights who cannot say BS.

Right on Jim!

cheers,

Rolf

--
Honorary Research Fellow
Department of Statistics
University of Auckland
Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276

______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
12