similar to: Best practices in developing package: From a single file

On 30/01/2018 11:29 AM, Brian G. Peterson wrote: > On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 17:00 +0100, Suzen, Mehmet wrote: >> Dear R developers, >> >> I am wondering what are the best practices for developing an R >> package. I am aware of Hadley Wickham's best practice >> documentation/book (http://r-pkgs.had.co.nz/).??I recall a couple of >> years ago there were some

Dear All: stepping in late, but @Joris, if you would like to take 'from a single file' literally, have a look at: https://github.com/bpfaff/lp4rp (lp4rp: literate programming for R packages); Cheers, Bernhard ps: incidentally, within the noweb-file roxygen is employed. -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: R-devel [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org] Im Auftrag von Joris

Mehmet, That is a loaded topic, not unlikely other topics preoccupying us these days. There is package.skeleton() in base R as you already mentioned. It drove me bonkers that it creates packages which then fail R CMD check, so I wrote a wrapper package (pkgKitten) with another helper function (kitten()) which calls the base R helper and then cleans up it---but otherwise remains faithful to it.

It is indeed a matter of what the developer is comfortable with and the one-stop solution provided by devtools is difficult to beat. This may also vary across projects. I use EMACS/ESS with and without roxygen2. In some cases EMACS/ESS+Org mode provides stunning benefits. Updating "usage" statements in Rd files was mentioned several times. Rdpack::reprompt() does this and more for

Joris, With the large caveat that I am not Duncan, and thus am not speaking for him, I can see an argument for his claim that I think is, more or less, true. roxygen2 (as far as I know as someone who uses it at least some of the time) maps to only a subset of Rd. It is the most commonly used subset, and so you can do most common things with it, but I think a pretty good case can be made for the

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 17:00 +0100, Suzen, Mehmet wrote: > Dear R developers, > > I am wondering what are the best practices for developing an R > package. I am aware of Hadley Wickham's best practice > documentation/book (http://r-pkgs.had.co.nz/).??I recall a couple of > years ago there were some tools for generating a package out of a > single file, such as using

Dear Duncan, With all respect, but I strongly disagree on your stance regarding roxygen2 for multiple reasons: 1. It is in my humble opinion not correct to evaluate a tool based on the abuse of some users. It's not because people write packages with bad documentation, that roxygen2 is to blame. I use roxygen2, and I care a great deal about documentation. So I actually took a bit offense

> >> I am wondering what are the best practices for developing an R > >> package. I am aware of Hadley Wickham's best practice > >> documentation/book (http://r-pkgs.had.co.nz/).??I recall a couple of > >> years ago there were some tools for generating a package out of a > >> single file, such as using package.skeleton, but no auto-generated

On 30/01/2018 4:30 PM, Kenny Bell wrote: > In response to Duncan regarding the use of roxygen2 from the point of view > of a current user, I believe the issue he brings up is one of correlation > rather than causation. Could be. However, I think editing comments in a .R file is a bit harder than editing text in a .Rd file, so I think the format discourages editing. I think it does

2017-11-30 3:14 GMT+01:00 Suzen, Mehmet <mehmet.suzen at gmail.com>: > My understanding is that there is no inconsistency. `is` does what it > claims, from the documentation: > > ?is?: With two arguments, tests whether ?object? can be treated as > from ?class2?. > > With one argument, returns all the super-classes of this > object's

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:24 AM, Lionel Henry <lionel at rstudio.com> wrote: > On 31 janv. 2018, at 09:08, Gabriel Becker <gmbecker at ucdavis.edu> wrote: > > > it *actively discourages* the bits it doesn't directly support. > > It may be discouraging to include Rd syntax in roxygen docs but only > because the LaTeX-like syntax of Rd is burdensome, not because

Hello, I am working on a web system (php) that uses R in the backend, and we need some basic fast encryption/decryption for the underlying mysql database that can be used by both R AND php. It does not need to be top-of-the-line, but just provide some basic level of fast encryption/decryption. Any suggestions? Thank you, Ramiro [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

> I'm not going to force anyone to use roxygen2. But I personally find it > easier to have the function right below the documentation, so that any > change to the function can immediately be documented as well. You prefer to > do this by keeping that strictly separated, which is absolutely fine. It's > just not my prefered workflow. Different animal, different habits I

This might be off topic, but if R-core development ever moves to git, I think it would make sense to have its own git service hosted by a university, rather than using github or gitlab. It is possible via https://gogs.io/ project. Just for the record. Best, -m

2017-11-30 14:13 GMT+01:00 Suzen, Mehmet <mehmet.suzen at gmail.com>: > On 30 November 2017 at 14:04, I?aki ?car <i.ucar86 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Am I supposed to read every reference on a man page just to know what >> to expect from a function? >> > > If the reference is from John Chamber, you are supposed to read it. As a joke, it's funny.

Dear Dr. Pfaff, Thank you for this, creating a package out of single file was my oriingal question, but not only creating and also maintaining it that way so R package is an artifact of the development process rather than "manually maintained" structure. I will have look at your sources. Best, Mehmet S?zen <suzen at acm.org> On 31 January 2018 at 15:51, Pfaff, Bernhard Dr.

On 31 October 2017 at 12:42, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > Notably as I think it's been provided by a company that no > longer exists under that name, and even if that'd be wrong, R-Fiddle > does not seem free software (apart from the R parts, I hope !). For the record, r-fiddle is maintained by datacamp:

AFAIK block comment is not possible it needs to be implemented in R interpreter and defined in the parser.'If' solution is not elegant. On 2 September 2017 at 14:09, Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote: > > > On 02.09.2017 11:40, Christian wrote: >> >> I consider it quite worth while to introduce into R syntax a nestable >> block comment

I don't think OP asked an unreasonable question at all. Civility! > On Jun 27, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Suzen, Mehmet <mehmet.suzen at gmail.com> wrote: > > Why don't you implement and uplad the package to CRAN? > > On 27 Jun 2017 17:45, "Chris Buddenhagen" <cbuddenhagen at gmail.com> wrote: > > Does anyone know of some code, and examples that

>>>>> Suzen, Mehmet <msuzen at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:16:30 +0100 writes: > Hi Frank, You could upload your R source file to a public > URL, for example to github and read via RCurl, as source > do not support https as far as I know. well... but your knowledge is severely (:-) outdated. Why did you not try first?