On 6/5/05, Jim Lemon <bitwrit at ozemail.com.au> wrote:> There are now about 500 packages on CRAN. Some are focused, covering a > particular area well, easy for the prospective user to discover their > potential usefulness, while others are less so.CRAN Task Views http://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/Views/ is one way of addressing CRAN organization.> I consider the plotrix packageWith respect to graphics, the R command: demo(graphics) provides a demonstration of what can be done in R (maybe plotrix should have a demo too?) and the site: http://addictedtor.free.fr/graphiques/ provides examples of what can be done in R using various packages and accepts content contributions. Also the R RSiteSearch function and help.search function are useful for discovery although the latter will only find functions in installed libraries.
Thanks for posting this; I think you raise good points, but they're more appropriate for R-devel, so I've posted my reply there. Duncan Murdoch
Hi. I think this discussion is more relevant to R-devel, so that's where I've sent my reply. Jim Lemon wrote:> Hello again, > > First, thanks for the help that got the latest plotrix package finished. > I had been planning to write something about packages since Scott > Waichler offered the gantt.chart function. Then Ben Bolker (who helped > me to write the axis.break function) asked if I would be willing to > include some of his plotting functions and almost immediately after that > Sander Oom kindly donated the soil texture plotting function in the same > way. I could procrastinate no longer. > > There are now about 500 packages on CRAN. Some are focused, covering a > particular area well, easy for the prospective user to discover their > potential usefulness, while others are less so. I consider the plotrix > package one of the former, and so as not to upset too many people, I > will use the other package I contributed to CRAN as an example of the > latter. > > When I initially wrote concord, it was intended as a package of > functions dealing with concordance and reliability. Okay, but I found > Kendall's W so useful that I couldn't help including it, and somehow > Page's test of ordered alternatives crept in and invited the Jonckheere > test to the party and at that point I realized that I had maybe forty or > fifty more or less useful functions floating around my R directory. Now > many of these are probably floating around other people's R directories > as well. Consider Cohen's kappa. The tabular method is included in > e1071, my version has Cohen's plus two additional methods, and the > recently contributed psy package has yet another version. Maybe there > are still more encrypted in packages that I haven't even looked at. > > The point of all this is that it would make many user's lives easier if > there were less pandemonium in packages. The mistakes I have made in > concord I have tried not to repeat in plotrix. Unless a user search of > the documentation in packages materializes, it's become mighty hard to > work out if the function you don't want to write has already been > written. We also spend a lot of time responding to or deriding > correspondents who ask about such things. > > Would it be an idea to have informal R periphery teams, or even > individual package lords, who would bear with, or maybe welcome, other > people's functions? That is, I think plotrix has been greatly enhanced > by recent contributions. Conversely, I wonder if it would be possible to > shrink or maybe even evaporate concord by discovering duplicate methods > in other packages or by contributing concord functions or parts thereof > myself. It's not that I don't like maintaining concord or think the > functions are worthless, just that I am mildly embarrassed to be adding > to the duplication of effort and unnecessary volume of packages. > > Feel free to comment upon this, although if you really want to rave, try > it out on me first before clagging the list. Thanks for your attention.A difficulty with multi-author packages is that it's harder to maintain consistency within the package, and it's harder to handle maintenance. Another approach is to try to keep your packages small and focussed. The problem with this is what you mentioned above: there are already 500 packages, and it's hard to know what's there. The "task views" should help with this, there are 5 online so far. (See <http://cran.us.r-project.org/src/contrib/Views>.) There is also a need for Misc packages for things too small to be a package on their own, but I think we need better ways to expose what is in them. Of course, with disk sizes as they are now, it's not unreasonable to install all of the contributed CRAN packages on a PC. Then help.search() *will* do searches through them all. Duncan Murdoch
Hello again, First, thanks for the help that got the latest plotrix package finished. I had been planning to write something about packages since Scott Waichler offered the gantt.chart function. Then Ben Bolker (who helped me to write the axis.break function) asked if I would be willing to include some of his plotting functions and almost immediately after that Sander Oom kindly donated the soil texture plotting function in the same way. I could procrastinate no longer. There are now about 500 packages on CRAN. Some are focused, covering a particular area well, easy for the prospective user to discover their potential usefulness, while others are less so. I consider the plotrix package one of the former, and so as not to upset too many people, I will use the other package I contributed to CRAN as an example of the latter. When I initially wrote concord, it was intended as a package of functions dealing with concordance and reliability. Okay, but I found Kendall's W so useful that I couldn't help including it, and somehow Page's test of ordered alternatives crept in and invited the Jonckheere test to the party and at that point I realized that I had maybe forty or fifty more or less useful functions floating around my R directory. Now many of these are probably floating around other people's R directories as well. Consider Cohen's kappa. The tabular method is included in e1071, my version has Cohen's plus two additional methods, and the recently contributed psy package has yet another version. Maybe there are still more encrypted in packages that I haven't even looked at. The point of all this is that it would make many user's lives easier if there were less pandemonium in packages. The mistakes I have made in concord I have tried not to repeat in plotrix. Unless a user search of the documentation in packages materializes, it's become mighty hard to work out if the function you don't want to write has already been written. We also spend a lot of time responding to or deriding correspondents who ask about such things. Would it be an idea to have informal R periphery teams, or even individual package lords, who would bear with, or maybe welcome, other people's functions? That is, I think plotrix has been greatly enhanced by recent contributions. Conversely, I wonder if it would be possible to shrink or maybe even evaporate concord by discovering duplicate methods in other packages or by contributing concord functions or parts thereof myself. It's not that I don't like maintaining concord or think the functions are worthless, just that I am mildly embarrassed to be adding to the duplication of effort and unnecessary volume of packages. Feel free to comment upon this, although if you really want to rave, try it out on me first before clagging the list. Thanks for your attention. Jim
On 6 Jun 2005 at 8:38, Jonathan Baron wrote:> So use my search engine and unclick all the options except for > "functions"? Do I need a different term?No, I'm being an idiot (as I suspected!) and had looked through your particular search interface and jumped to the big CRAN one. Replying this to R-help list for public helping of humble porridge and in case anyone else is making same mistake. Thanks for a great search facility!> BTW, there is a package called ltm for IRT, but my search is not > picking it up. I think there is a problem! (It may be fixed by > the time you read this.)Yup: ltm has got some of what I want but not all yet!! All power to you on your search interface and thanks again. C -- Chris Evans <chris at psyctc.org> Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy, Rampton Hospital; Research Programmes Director, Nottinghamshire NHS Trust, Hon. SL Institute of Psychiatry *** My views are my own and not representative of those institutions ***
> From: Chris Evans > > On 6 Jun 2005 at 7:02, Jonathan Baron wrote: > > > I haven't followed this thread, but the web interface may exist. > > (Perhaps "help.search()" does something that Namazu doesn't do, > > but I don't think so.) See my .sig below. > > > > This is where you get if you click on "Search" in the R home > > page. > Not quite: that's wonderful and I use it a lot but it throws up much > more from r-project than just the search of the current release > packages would in help.search() so it can give you much more than you > need ... if there are tuning parameters one can add that will do the > necessary, and I'm sure there are, then I'd love to see then and > ideally see another search box that applied them for us!Try something like RSiteSearch("your phrase", restrict="function"). The search page itself has more options.> But thanks Jonathan!Indeed! Andy> Chris > -- > Chris Evans <chris at psyctc.org> > Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy, Rampton Hospital; > Research Programmes Director, Nottinghamshire NHS Trust, > Hon. SL Institute of Psychiatry > *** My views are my own and not representative of those institutions > *** > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide! > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > > >