Skip to content

Evaluation of function names...

3 messages · Bert Gunter, Brian Ripley

#
Folks:

Feel free to provide me a link or reference instead of an answer.

Preamble:

f <- function() function(x)rnorm(x)
g <- f()
g(3)
## [1] -0.4448492 -0.2379978 -0.4537394

## But
rnorm <- function()1  ## nasty nasty
g(3)
## Error in rnorm(x) : unused argument(s) (x)

## of course f <- function()function(x)stats:::rnorm(x)
## would fix this.

Question 1:
Suppose I defined f() as at top in a package namespace and exported it.
Would a user see this same error defining g() and with rnorm redefined
as above? (Assume stats is attached as usual).  I presume so, but ...

Question 2:
If the answer to Q1 is yes, (how) can this be avoided without using fully
qualified function names?

Again, a quick reference to relevant docs would suffice.

Thanks.
#
On 07/06/2013 14:49, Bert Gunter wrote:
Not if done right.  The package should importFrom(stats, rnorm).
'Writing R Extensions' says

'The namespace controls the search strategy for variables used by 
functions in the package. If not found locally, R searches the package 
namespace first, then the imports, then the base namespace and then the 
normal search path.'
#
Thank you. That answers my question.

-- Bert
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Prof Brian Ripley <ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk> wrote: