similar to: setMethod does not work in Window 7??

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

Hi I am having difficulty with setMethod(). I have a "brob" class of objects whose representation has two slots: "x" and "positive". Slot "x" (double) holds the log of a number and slot "positive" (logical) its sign. The idea is that large numbers can be handled. I'm trying to implement a log() method using an analogue of the

Hello everybody R version 2.4.0 alpha (2006-09-15 r39323), MacOSX 10.4.7 Next S4 problem. I have "brob" objects that are large real numbers, and now I want "glub" numbers that are to be a pair of glubs that represent complex numbers. I want to define binary operator "+" so that if either the left or right argument are glubs, it uses .ArithGlub. If either

Hi, I want to set a default value in a method of a generic function. This seems as though it should be possible. From R help on setMethod... Method definitions can have default expressions for arguments. If those arguments are then missing in the call to the generic function, the default expression in the method is used. If the method definition has no default for the

Hi In V&R the "polynomial" class is explicitly specified to have no logical operators: setMethod("Logic", signature(e1="polynomial"), function(e1,e2){stop ("...")}) I too have a class of objects for which I want to specify that Logic operators do not work, but executing setClass("brob", representation = representation

Dear all, My apologies for re-posting this question, but I have not found any solution to my problem so far. I also think that my post may have been overseen due to the posting time and high traffic on this list. I experience a problem in implementing a S4 class in a package and would appreciate your help in this matter. The class is implemented using Rcpp, which works well. I then extend

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",

after this setClass("A") setGeneric("bar", function(x, y) standardGeneric("bar")) setMethod(bar, signature(x="A", y="A"), function(x, y) {}) setMethod(bar, signature(x="A", y="ANY"), function(x, y) {}) the method for signature c("A", "A") contains package information > str(getMethod(bar,

Should R CMD check consider it an error to define a new method using setMethod for a class which is not currently defined? It seems to me that it would be best not to consider this an error. What currently happens in that setMethod issues a warning, quite correctly. This warning produces an object 'last.warning'. Then R CMD check issues a WARNING that 'last.warning' is an

Hello I've checked through previous postings but don't see a fully equivalent problem-just a few hints. I have been trying to set a new method for the existing function "table" or "as.data.frame.table" for my class "tfSites". Taking out all the useful code and just returning the input class I get the error setMethod("table",

Dear all! I do definetley have some difficulties. Here is my code: > setMethod("write", + signature(object = "KMatrix", path = "character"), + function(object,path){ + write.table(object at data,path,row.names=FALSE, sep = "\t") + } + ) error in match.call(fun, fcall) : unused

Hi all, I have a self written likelihood as a model and functions to optimize and get fitted values, confidence intervals ect. I wonder if there is a way to define a 'class', or a 'model' (or a certain object)? so that I can use 'summary' to produce a summary like it does for a lm object. Also, it should be able to use 'predict' and 'plot' and other

Hi, we have some questions concerning the definition of new arithmetic methods. In our package "distr" (on CRAN) we define some new arithmetic methods for "+", "-", "*", "/". After loading "distr" the corresponding arithmetic methods work. Now, if we define a new class and also a new method for one of the arithmetic methods

Thanks I think you have both answered my question (reckon Ill go S3 on that). As an adjunct to this do you know what might be the best reference to the S4 methods current implementation. I have ordered the Chambers book "Programming with Data", and I have a short tutorial-- "S4 Classes in 15 pages, more or less". Have I missed any other useful resources? Stephen Henderson

Hi R-helper! I have problem with setMethods for "[". Here is example : setClass("myClass", representation(ID.r = "numeric", ID.c = "character", DAT = "matrix")) to.myClass <- function(ID.r, ID.c, DAT) {     out <- new("myClass", ID.r = ID.r, ID.c = ID.c, DAT = DAT)     return(out)       }       setMethod("[",

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",

Hi R-Help, Please consider the following simple case: I have a class like setClass("myClass", representation(x="matrix", y="character")) and I would like to use the method *"["* for a *myClass* objects (but changing the default *drop* argument from TRUE to FALSE): setMethod("[","myClass", function(x,i,j,...,drop=FALSE)

I noticed this oddity about R profiling and setMethod. First, I "test out" Rprof. > require(methods) Loading required package: methods [1] TRUE > > Rprof("test.out") > data.frame("a") X.a. 1 a > Rprof(NULL) So far, so good. Next, I define myClass. > setClass("myClass", representation(mySlot = "numeric")) [1]

Full_Name: Kevin C. Bartz Version: 1.5.1 OS: Solaris 2.6 Submission from: (NULL) (192.223.226.5) A while ago, I noticed this oddity about R profiling and setMethod. First, I "test out" Rprof. > require(methods) Loading required package: methods [1] TRUE > > Rprof("test.out") > data.frame("a") X.a. 1 a > Rprof(NULL) So far, so good. Next, I

I noticed this oddity about [ and setMethod. First, I define testFunc, which sorts a data frame by the first column and returns the entries that aren't NAs, and testIt, which runs testFunc repeatedly on a random large data frame, each time saving the return into a dummy placeholder (for demonstration's sake). > require(methods) Loading required package: methods [1] TRUE > testFunc