Hi
it says in R-exts that
A method must have all the arguments of the generic,
including ... if the generic does.
A method must have arguments in exactly the same order as the
generic.
A method should use the same defaults as the generic.
So, how come the arguments for rep() are (x, times, ...) and the
arguments
for rep.default() are (x, times, length.out, each, ...) ? Shouldn't
these be the same?
I am writing a rep() method for objects with class "octonion", and
my function rep.octonion() has argument list (x, times, length.out,
each, ...)
just like rep.default(), but R CMD check complains about it, pointing
out that rep() and rep.octonion() have different arguments.
What do I have to do to my rep.octonion() function to make my package
pass R CMD check without warning?
--
Robin Hankin
Uncertainty Analyst
National Oceanography Centre, Southampton
European Way, Southampton SO14 3ZH, UK
tel 023-8059-7743
>>>>> "Robin" == Robin Hankin <r.hankin at noc.soton.ac.uk> >>>>> on Wed, 31 Aug 2005 08:09:15 +0100 writes:Robin> Hi it says in R-exts that 1) A method must have all the arguments of the generic, including ... if the generic does. 2) A method must have arguments in exactly the same order as the generic. 3) A method should use the same defaults as the generic. Robin> So, how come the arguments for rep() are (x, times, ...) and the Robin> arguments Robin> for rep.default() are (x, times, length.out, each, ...) ? Shouldn't Robin> these be the same? no. If they should be the same, the "R-exts" manual would use a much shorter formulation than the carefully crafted points 1--3 above! The point is that methods often have *extra* arguments which match the "..." of the generic. That's one of the points about "..." ! Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich Robin> I am writing a rep() method for objects with class "octonion", and Robin> my function rep.octonion() has argument list (x, times, length.out, Robin> each, ...) Robin> just like rep.default(), but R CMD check complains about it, pointing Robin> out that rep() and rep.octonion() have different arguments. Robin> What do I have to do to my rep.octonion() function to make my package Robin> pass R CMD check without warning? Robin> -- Robin> Robin Hankin Robin> Uncertainty Analyst Robin> National Oceanography Centre, Southampton Robin> European Way, Southampton SO14 3ZH, UK Robin> tel 023-8059-7743 Robin> ______________________________________________ Robin> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list Robin> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel Robin> A method must have all the arguments of the Robin> generic, including ... if the generic does. A method Robin> must have arguments in exactly the same order as the Robin> generic. A method should use the same defaults as Robin> the generic. Robin> So, how come the arguments for rep() are (x, times, Robin> ...) and the arguments for rep.default() are (x, Robin> times, length.out, each, ...) ? Shouldn't these be Robin> the same? Robin> I am writing a rep() method for objects with class Robin> "octonion", and my function rep.octonion() has Robin> argument list (x, times, length.out, each, ...) just Robin> like rep.default(), but R CMD check complains about Robin> it, pointing out that rep() and rep.octonion() have Robin> different arguments. Robin> What do I have to do to my rep.octonion() function to Robin> make my package pass R CMD check without warning? Robin> -- Robin Hankin Uncertainty Analyst National Robin> Oceanography Centre, Southampton European Way, Robin> Southampton SO14 3ZH, UK tel 023-8059-7743 Robin> ______________________________________________ Robin> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list Robin> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>>>> "Robin" == Robin Hankin <r.hankin at noc.soton.ac.uk> >>>>> on Wed, 31 Aug 2005 08:09:15 +0100 writes:................ Robin> I am writing a rep() method for objects with class "octonion", and Robin> my function rep.octonion() has argument list (x, times, length.out, Robin> each, ...) Robin> just like rep.default(), but R CMD check complains about it, pointing Robin> out that rep() and rep.octonion() have different arguments. Hmm, not exactly, ``like rep.default'', I'm pretty sure. Why not peek into R's <source>/src/library/base/man/rep.Rd which has \usage{ rep(x, times, \dots) \method{rep}{default}(x, times, length.out, each, \dots) } and definitely passes R CMD check without a warning. Robin> What do I have to do to my rep.octonion() function to make my package Robin> pass R CMD check without warning?
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 08:09 +0100, Robin Hankin wrote:> Hi > > it says in R-exts that > > > A method must have all the arguments of the generic, > including ... if the generic does. > A method must have arguments in exactly the same order as the > generic. > A method should use the same defaults as the generic. > > > So, how come the arguments for rep() are (x, times, ...) and the > arguments > for rep.default() are (x, times, length.out, each, ...) ?Shouldn't> these be the same? > > > I am writing a rep() method for objects with class "octonion", and > my function rep.octonion() has argument list (x, times, length.out, > each, ...) > just like rep.default(), but R CMD check complains about it,pointing> out that rep() and rep.octonion() have different arguments. > > What do I have to do to my rep.octonion() function to make my package > pass R CMD check without warning? >I cannot repeat your problem. Probably you did something differently than you said (like omitted "..." , misspelled times as time or something else in your rep.octonion). This is what I tried. In R:> str(rep)function (x, times, ...)> rep.octonion <- function(x, times, length.out, each, ...) {} > package.skeleton("octonion", "rep.octonion")Creating directories ... Creating DESCRIPTION ... Creating READMEs ... Saving functions and data ... Making help files ... Created file named './octonion/man/rep.octonion.Rd'. Edit the file and move it to the appropriate directory. Done. Further steps are described in ./octonion/README Then I edited octonion/man/rep.octonion.Rd so that it uses the generic and passes R CMD check (virgin Rd files produced by package.skeleton fail the test, which I found a bit weird). Here are the minimum changes you need to pass the tests. --- rep.octonion.Rd.orig 2005-08-31 10:56:36.000000000 +0300 +++ rep.octonion.Rd 2005-08-31 10:55:25.000000000 +0300 @@ -7,5 +7,5 @@ } \usage{ -rep.octonion(x, times, length.out, each, ...) +\method{rep}{octonion}(x, times, length.out, each, ...) } %- maybe also 'usage' for other objects documented here. @@ -18,5 +18,5 @@ } \details{ - ~~ If necessary, more details than the __description__ above ~~ + ~~ If necessary, more details than the description above ~~ } \value{ @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ \note{ ~~further notes~~ } - ~Make other sections like Warning with \section{Warning }{....} ~ -\seealso{ ~~objects to See Also as \code{\link{~~fun~~}}, ~~~ } + +\seealso{ ~~objects to See Also as \code{\link{rep}}, ~~~ } \examples{ ##---- Should be DIRECTLY executable !! ---- @@ -42,4 +42,4 @@ function(x, time, length.out, each, ...) {} } -\keyword{ ~kwd1 }% at least one, from doc/KEYWORDS -\keyword{ ~kwd2 }% __ONLY ONE__ keyword per line +\keyword{ models }% at least one, from doc/KEYWORDS + So this replaces rep.octonion with \method{rep}{octonion}, removes __ from description (these cause latex errors), remove a hanging top level text "Make other sections...", and removes a link to non-existent ~~fun~~ (I'm not sure if adding a real keyword is necessary). This passes tests. Including * checking S3 generic/method consistency ... OK Conclusion: check your files. (It is pain: been there, done that.) cheers, jari oksanen