similar to: SetGeneric and formula interfaces

I have some questions about S4 style methods and generics. First of all, is there any way of using default values for arguments in the generics/methods? My own experiments show that such arguments are always ignored. The green book seems to be silent on this matter. The second question is about using a non-trivial function body for generics. Page 351 of the green book gives an example of this

Dear all, I can't see how setGeneric() works. I know perfectly well how to define library(methods); setClass("Square", representation(side="numeric")); # Will become the default method. getArea <- function(object) { stop(paste("Method getArea() is not defined for this class:", data.class(object))); } setMethod("getArea",

Hi, I found the following on Windows 2000/NT R Version 1.9.1 (2004-06-21) (also Version 1.9.0): The S4 group "Math" doesn't work as documented; i.e., "log", "log10", "gamma" and "lgamma" are included in the documentation but don't work. See example code below. Moreover, what about 'genericForPrimitive' which is used in

My question has two parts. The first is with regard to the frame or environment in which generic functions are defined in packages. It seems as though they are defined (i.e. exist as objects) in frame 1, even when defined in a package. The following is a short example: setClass("track",representation(x="numeric",y="numeric")) plotTrack <- function(x,y,...)

Hello, I have defined a new class > setClass("myclass", representation(min = "numeric", max = "numeric")) and want to write accessor functions, so that for > foo = new("myclass", min = 0, max = 1) > min(foo) # prints 0 > max(foo) # prints 1 At first i created a generic function for "min" > setGeneric("min",

1. Is it always the case that when defining generic functions in a package, the package needs to be installed as a binary package to avoid having the generic functions in the .GlobalEnv? 2. Defining a generic function in a "non-binary" package triggers a check warning $ R CMD check ... ... * checking for code/documentation mismatches ... WARNING Objects

Full_Name: Henrik Bengtsson Version: R v1.4.1 OS: WinMe Submission from: (NULL) (217.208.14.137) Doing the following library(methods) setGeneric("foo", function(x) standardGeneric("foo")) setMethod("foo", "ANY", function(x) cat(x)) fails with Error in while (value[n] == "ANY") n <- n - 1 : missing value where logical needed It

Hi the list When two setGeneric occurs on the same function, the second erage the first and erase all the function previously define. Is it possible to prevent that ? Is it possible to declare a setGeneric that can not be erased later ? Something like the |sealed for setMethod...| || |Thanks| || Christophe

In the last few days I've received couple of messages pointing out that our SparseM package fails to install on the patched version of 1.7.0. Laurent Gaultier kindly suggested that replacing: setGeneric("as.matrix.csr") by setGeneric("as.matrix.csr", function(x, nrow, ncol, eps) standardGeneric("as.matrix.csr")) was sufficient to fix the problem.

hi. below is a small test case (hopefully minimal, though i'm still a bit confused about initializers). i would have guessed (and maybe i still would have been right) that one could re-use the name of a generic function for functions with different numbers of arguments. in the case below, class A's bB() queries the status of a single A object, so bB(A) (where here "A" is an

I created some S4 objects that are essentially data frame objects. The S4 object definitions were necessary to verify data integrity and force a standardized data format. I am, however, finding myself redefining all the typical generic functions so that I can still manipulate my S4 objects as if they were data frames ... I have used setMethod to set methods for "subset",

Hi, Please consider the following trivial example. In the sample code I first define a class MVCa using composition. This class contains a slot of type list. Next I define an inheritance relation using the function setIs -> MVCa "is a" list. Then I define a function printlength which prints the list-length which is defined for the type "list". If I call this function

I do lots of analyses on large microarray data sets so memory use and speed and both important issues for me. I have been trying to estimate the overheads associated with using formal S4 data objects instead of ordinary lists for large data objects. In some simple experiments (using R 1.7.1 in Windows 2000) with large but simple objects it seems that giving a data object a formal class

I'm trying to write a package which uses classes/methods as defined in the `methods' package. I have a single .R file which defines the class and various methods for that class. At the top of the file I have require(methods) and then setClass("myclass", ...) setGeneric("intersect") setMethod("intersect", "myclass", function(x,y) ...) I noticed

Hi, We are developing a package using S4 classes. The S4 classes are wrappers to C++ classes. So S4 classes contain an integer that is the memory address of one C++ object. If an user calls the rm() function, the C++ object must be deleted. But our generic rm() function apparently doesn't work. Here is the code: # The class setClass("component",

Full_Name: Bert Gunter Version: 2.1.1 OS: Windows 2000 Submission from: (NULL) (192.12.78.250) There appears to be either a bug or documentation problem in setMethod/setGeneric with how default arguments are handled. The setMethod Help says: ****** Method definitions can have default expressions for arguments. If those arguments are then missing in the call to the generic function, the default

I feel tedious when I define a S4 class and the methods. For each method, I have to call both setMethod and setGeneric (or both setReplaceMethod and setGeneric). I would like a more compact grammar so that I can reduce the key strokes. I'm wondering if there is a better way available. setClass( Class='A', representation=representation( x='numeric' )

Hi the list I am creating a package and I have a problem to define a S4 method for plot. I define a class 'A' and a class 'B'. I want to define a function plot for signature c(A,missing) and another method plot for signature c(A,B). My code is the following : In /package/R/ directory: --- main.R --- setGeneric("plot",function(x,y,...){standardGeneric("plot")})

Hello, If the signature of a method defines which generic it implements then I'm confused about why this minimal example I invented won't work : setGeneric("myFun", function(rs, ...){standardGeneric("myFun")}) setGeneric("myFun", function(cs, ...){standardGeneric("myFun")}) setMethod("myFun", "numeric", function(rs, colour =

i believe the following is true but would appreciate confirmation that it is intended behavior and will continue: if a default argument is employed in the definition of a generic function, and the generic is called with the argument in question (call it 'ARG') missing, then the method for signature (..., ARG = "missing", ...) will be called by 'standardGeneric'