From gb at stat.umu.se  Mon Sep 20 12:46:58 2004
From: gb at stat.umu.se (gb)
Date: Mon Sep 20 12:47:06 2004
Subject: [Rd] Namespace problem
In-Reply-To: <16718.45157.239090.972874@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <20040919165149.GA7954@stat.umu.se>
	<16718.38976.221866.25262@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<20040920090057.GB20279@stat.umu.se>
	<16718.45157.239090.972874@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <20040920104658.GA32606@stat.umu.se>

On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 12:26:45PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
> >>>>> "GB" == G?ran Brostr?m <gb@stat.umu.se>
> >>>>>     on Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:00:57 +0200 writes:
> 
>     GB> On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:43:44AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
>     >> >>>>> "GB" == G?ran Brostr?m <gb@stat.umu.se>
>     >> >>>>>     on Sun, 19 Sep 2004 18:51:49 +0200 writes:
> 

> We do encourage not using "." for new function names because of
> the reason above, but it's definitely not a requirement.
> In the case where  'foo'  is an S3 generic function name,
> we however recommend quite strongly not to use 
>    'foo.bar'
> as function name since it looks "too much" like an S3 method.
> Is this the case for you?

No.

> 
>     GB> But how is this problem connected to using C/Fortran code?
> 
> only via "namespace magic".

Yes, magic is the word: I got 'R CMD check' and NAMESPACE working by
cleaning 'R' from '*.R~' files and 'src' from old '.o' files and an old
'eha.so' (from 1.x.x something)!  

Another thought: Since I really haven't used S3 methods so far, should I go
for S4 methods directly?

G?ran
-- 
 G?ran Brostr?m                    tel: +46 90 786 5223
 Department of Statistics          fax: +46 90 786 6614
 Ume? University                   http://www.stat.umu.se/egna/gb/
 SE-90187 Ume?, Sweden             e-mail: gb@stat.umu.se


[Rd] Namespace problem
gb