[Sent to R-help by mistake. Sorry]
I have been checking my package coda with the current R-devel
using "R CMD check". As usual, this has uncovered a large number
of errors and inconsistencies in my documentation, for which I
am very grateful.
The only problem I have is with code/documentation mismatches when I
have written a method for a generic function, e.g.
* checking for code/documentation mismatches ... WARNING
Objects with usage in documentation object `plot.mcmc' but missing from
code:
[1] "plot"
Objects with usage in documentation object `summary.mcmc' but missing from
code:[1] "summary"
Objects with usage in documentation object `time.mcmc' but missing from
code:
[1] "end" "start" "time"
Objects with usage in documentation object `window.mcmc' but missing from
code:
[1] "window"
This occurs because, for example, I have documented the usage of
summary.mcmc as
\usage{
summary(data, quantiles = c(0.025, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 0.975), ...)
}
I'm being encouraged to document it as
\usage{
summary.mcmc(data, quantiles = c(0.025, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 0.975), ...)
}
but I don't think this is right. Surely the correct usage of a method
is to call the generic function?
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
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._