Message-ID: <20040920104658.GA32606@stat.umu.se>
Date: 2004-09-20T12:47:06Z
From: Göran Broström
Subject: Namespace problem
In-Reply-To: <16718.45157.239090.972874@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 12:26:45PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
> >>>>> "GB" == G?ran Brostr?m <gb@stat.umu.se>
> >>>>> on Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:00:57 +0200 writes:
>
> GB> On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:43:44AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
> >> >>>>> "GB" == G?ran Brostr?m <gb@stat.umu.se>
> >> >>>>> on Sun, 19 Sep 2004 18:51:49 +0200 writes:
>
> We do encourage not using "." for new function names because of
> the reason above, but it's definitely not a requirement.
> In the case where 'foo' is an S3 generic function name,
> we however recommend quite strongly not to use
> 'foo.bar'
> as function name since it looks "too much" like an S3 method.
> Is this the case for you?
No.
>
> GB> But how is this problem connected to using C/Fortran code?
>
> only via "namespace magic".
Yes, magic is the word: I got 'R CMD check' and NAMESPACE working by
cleaning 'R' from '*.R~' files and 'src' from old '.o' files and an old
'eha.so' (from 1.x.x something)!
Another thought: Since I really haven't used S3 methods so far, should I go
for S4 methods directly?
G?ran
--
G?ran Brostr?m tel: +46 90 786 5223
Department of Statistics fax: +46 90 786 6614
Ume? University http://www.stat.umu.se/egna/gb/
SE-90187 Ume?, Sweden e-mail: gb@stat.umu.se