From b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk  Wed Jul  8 18:13:37 2009
From: b.rowlingson at lancaster.ac.uk (Barry Rowlingson)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 17:13:37 +0100
Subject: [Rd] "Roxygenating" packages
In-Reply-To: <f8e6ff050907080753i27b806e5r84a62a26fe51f148@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d8ad40b50907080407y5bcc3a64r5c8a70271bc1dc3a@mail.gmail.com>
	<f8e6ff050907080753i27b806e5r84a62a26fe51f148@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d8ad40b50907080913m75640879o8295cca370b1f128@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:53 PM, hadley wickham<h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds like a neat idea! ?Especially with Duncan Murdoch's recent work
> making it easy to parse rdoc files in R.

 I reckon the tricky bit is going to be working out how to map the
various possibilities of rdoc files into Roxygen syntax.

 We do have a huge potential test suite though, since once the .R
files are passed through Roxygen we should get back the .Rd files that
we started with....

 For example, just looking at the sp package, there's gridded.R which
has functions documented in gridded-methods.Rd. Are Rd file names
essentially arbitrary, meaning we need to look at the \alias section
to see what functions are documented? And then if those functions are
in more than one .R file what do we do?

 The various class descriptions and methods also seem to be scattered
amongst various files too. This is not an easy problem...

Barry



[Rd] "Roxygenating" packages
Barry Rowlingson