Skip to content
Prev 19528 / 63424 Next

Matrix / SparseM conflict (PR#8618)

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Duncan Murdoch wrote:

            
The problem appears to be that SparseM first redefines chol as an S3 
generic and then defines S4 methods on it.  As no new S3 methods are then 
defined the S3 step would seem unnecessary, but it is used to allow the 
package to define S4 methods on a different signature from R's chol().
(That seems to me to be asking for trouble.)

Only the package maintainer of SparseM can do anything about this.

Beyond, that I guess it is a consequence of namespaces that Matrix 
defines methods via a derived generic on base::chol and not on the generic 
chol in SparseM.  That needs further thought by someone (JMC?) who 
understands the S4 internals.
But the whole point of generic functions is to allow one to write generic 
code.