R devel - Feb 1999 - "as" functions should be generic

It would be very useful if all "as.*" functions were generic,
so that a user who creates a new class can write methods to
coerce objects of that class to standard R objects.

In fact, most of the "as.*" functions are generic, but there
are a few that aren't:
as.array
as.factor
as.ordered
as.pairlist
as.formula
as.ts

It's actually "as.array" and "as.ts" that are a problem
for
me, but I mention the others because this seems like a good
general principle.

Martyn
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To:
r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._

>>>>> Martyn Plummer writes:
> It would be very useful if all "as.*" functions were generic,
> so that a user who creates a new class can write methods to
> coerce objects of that class to standard R objects.
> In fact, most of the "as.*" functions are generic, but there
> are a few that aren't:
> as.array
> as.factor
> as.ordered
> as.pairlist
> as.formula
> as.ts
> It's actually "as.array" and "as.ts" that are a
problem for
> me, but I mention the others because this seems like a good
> general principle.
This may be a good idea.

-k

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To:
r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._