Gábor Csárdi

Alternative syntax ideas: ``` r ## This needs NSE to get `x` progress > for (i in x) { } ## This knows `x` right away, no NSE needed progress(x)...

`>` will not work, because there seems to be no way to capture the unevaluated argument (except for completely redefining `>`, which I don't want). So we need to go...

> `for (i in 1:10) %>% progress { print(i) }` This is not valid R syntax, I am afraid. It does not parse. > `progress %

Looks like `%%` does not work, actually. It has to be a conventional user defined `%%` operator then, e.g. `%P%` or `%~~~%`.

That's not possible, unfortunately. I could use `?` or `!`, but neither are very good.

Work is going on in the https://github.com/gaborcsardi/progress/tree/decorator branch now.

A relevant discussion: https://github.com/hadley/purrr/issues/149 I quite like the functional form: ``` r progressify(lapply)(seq, fun) ``` and maybe this does not even require NSE. We just create a new function that...

@kendonB I have probably seen it, I am not sure to be honest.

@wch I don't think this is desired, I mean having to keep the generator function, with its environment, for every single object.

How about just not keeping the static methods/variables for objects? If the user needs the static methods, they'll just use the generator. If an object needs the static method, they...