Hi,
Say we want to supply a generic plot() in a package with a simple class,
like this:
---<--------------------cut
here---------------start------------------->---
setClass("track",
representation=representation(x="numeric",
y="numeric"))
if (!isGeneric("plot")) {
setGeneric("plot",
function(x, y, ...) standardGeneric("plot"))
}
setMethod("plot", signature(x="track",
y="missing"),
function(x, y, ...) {
plot(x at x, x at y, ...)
})
---<--------------------cut
here---------------end--------------------->---
To document the new method, I thought argument 'y' shouldn't need to
be
documented in the package because it's declared 'missing', and the
following in plot-methods.Rd would be ok:
---<--------------------cut
here---------------start------------------->---
\name{plot-methods}
\docType{methods}
\alias{plot-methods}
\alias{plot}
\alias{plot,track,missing-method}
\title{Methods}
\description{A plotting method}
\usage{\S4method{plot}{track,missing}(x, \ldots)}
\arguments{
\item{x}{track.}
\item{\ldots}{Arguments passed to \code{\link{plot}}.}
}
\section{Methods}{
\describe{
\item{plot}{\code{signature(x="track", y="missing")}:
some plot.}
}
}
\keyword{methods}
---<--------------------cut
here---------------end--------------------->---
yet 'R CMD check' issues a warning:
---<--------------------cut
here---------------start------------------->---
Codoc mismatches from documentation object 'plot-methods':
\S4method{plot}{track,missing}
Code: function(x, y, ...)
Docs: function(x, ...)
Argument names in code not in docs:
y
Mismatches in argument names:
Position: 2 Code: y Docs: ...
---<--------------------cut
here---------------end--------------------->---
So it seems as if I'm asked to document the generic, not the particular
method. What am I misunderstanding? Thanks.
Cheers,
--
Seb