similar to: Hashes as S4 Classes, or: How to separate environments

Hi all, Prefix: I am a frustrated Java coder in R. I am coding a medium sized ecosystem modelling program in R. I have changed to using S4 objects and it has cost me an order of magnitude in execution speed over the functional model. I cannot afford this penalty and have found that it is the result of all the passing-by-value of objects. I see that you can now safely inherit from

Hi, I'm looking for some guidance on whether to use S4 or Reference Classes for an analysis application I'm developing. I'm a C++/Python developer, and like to 'think' in OOD. I started my app with S4, thinking that was the best set of OO features in R. However, it appears that one needs Reference Classes to allow object methods to assign values (other than

I was surprised just now to find out that `topenv(emptyenv())` equals ? `.GlobalEnv`, not `emptyenv()`. From my understanding of the description of `topenv`, it should walk up the chain of enclosing environments (as if by calling `e = parent.env(e)` repeatedly; in fact, that is almost exactly its implementation in envir.c) until it hits a top level. However, `emptyenv()` has no enclosing

Hi, i have used S4 classes to implement a unified access to random number generators (package rstream on CRAN). I have used a construct to allow optional arguments: if(!isGeneric("rstream.sample")) setGeneric("rstream.sample", function(stream,...) standardGeneric("rstream.sample")) setMethod("rstream.sample",

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'

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

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 =

Hi, I'm doing a k-means cluster with 6 clusters and 15 variables. Any suggestions on how to plot the results? I've tried the standard xy plot, but couldn't get much of it. Thansk in advance, Iuri.

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

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

Hello. This question concerns the Methods package. I have created a new class and am trying to set a method for it for S4 group generic "Summary". I have run into some signature problems. An example: > setClass("track", representation(x="numeric", y="character")) [1] "track" > setGeneric("max", group="Summary")

Hi I want to create a new generic method, but I end up with an error (evaluation nested too deeply). see the transcript below. The function beginYear.Fun() works, but not beginYear. I have no idea why. Any ideas welcome, Rainer > setClass("fun", representation(x = "numeric")) [1] "fun" > new("fun") An object of class ?fun? Slot "x":

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' )

Dear R-users, Is there a way to test whether a particular environment e is equal to emtyenv(), or for that sake whether two environments e1 and e2 are equal? I tried a couple of ways to compare environments, but neither seem to work: > e1 <- new.env() > e2 <- new.env() > e1 == e2 Error in e1 == e2 : comparison (1) is possible only for atomic and list types > all.equal(e1,

Some quick questions about S4 methods. Does the typing of S4 methods mean that lazy evaluation is no longer possible? It seems that you would need to evaluate the arguments to determine their type at dispatch. Second, what role, if any, do default arguments play in S4 methods? I notice that you can put default arguments into generics but that the dispatch is still done on the type of the

Hi the list, I define a method that want to change an object without assignation (foo(x) and not x<-foo(x)) using deparse and assign. But when the argument of the method does not match *exactly* with the definition of the generic function, assign does not work... Anything wrong? Christophe #------ Does not work ------#

Hi, I'm having some trouble setting methods for the qr family of functions. I believe I have distilled my misunderstanding in the code snippet below: foo <- function(x, ...) UseMethod("foo") foo.default <- function(x) { } # foo setGeneric(name = "foo", useAsDefault = foo) setMethod("foo", signature(x="bar"), function(x, ...) { } )

please see the code below. foo2 fails to dispatch correctly, but foo does fine. i have tried 'cacheMetaData(1)' and a number of different variants of 'cacheGenericsMetaData', on the possibility there is a caching issue. but i still can't sort it out. also one general question: does it really matter what's in the body of the function definition in a

Hello everyone, I encountered the following confusing behavior of 'deparse' and 'substitute' while programming with S4 classes (see example below). It seems like the presence of '...' argument in the definition of the generic generates the problem. I have no clue why, can anyone explain that to me? Are there any "workarounds"? Thanks a lot for your time!

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