From pgilbert902 at gmail.com  Thu Aug 29 01:50:00 2013
From: pgilbert902 at gmail.com (Paul Gilbert)
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 19:50:00 -0400
Subject: [Rd] =?windows-1252?q?=91=3A=3A=3A=92_call?=
In-Reply-To: <CABdHhvEiR-nWOBA36gTgpexqy3ASzHw9QtXKqqd+KB6gX=pMuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <521E221E.3020107@gmail.com>
	<E340A230-94C4-4ED3-BD42-0C72F8CAC340@me.com>
	<521E4666.8080603@gmail.com>
	<CANROs4dNke+TBd2OVrY9q_cvLCVh9JkWsy+XaT66s_Ns3gcRpw@mail.gmail.com>
	<521E5AD0.7070409@gmail.com>
	<CABdHhvEiR-nWOBA36gTgpexqy3ASzHw9QtXKqqd+KB6gX=pMuw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <521E8CA8.30205@gmail.com>



On 13-08-28 05:13 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>>   3/ Some functions are exported normally but hidden by using "." in the
>> beginning of their names. Other package maintainers would know they exist,
>> but end users would not so easily find them. (Duncan's other suggestion of
>> using \keyword{internal} in the .Rd file strikes me as problematic. I'm
>> surprised CRAN checks do not already object to functions exported and
>> documented with \keyword{internal}.)
>
> Why? I think this is exactly the use case of \keyword{internal}.
>

 From Writing R extensions "The special keyword ?internal? marks a page 
of internal objects that are not part of the package?s API" which 
suggests to me that a function with \keyword{internal} should not be 
exported, since that makes it part of the API. And, if it is really for 
internal use in a package, why would you export it? I think you are 
interpreting "internal" to mean internal to a group of packages, not 
internal to a package. But that is just the complement of what I am 
saying: there may be a need for two levels of export.

(Also, if you export it then you should document it, but for many 
maintainers \keyword{internal} is shorthand for I don't need to document 
this properly because no one is suppose to use it outside the package.)

Paul



[Rd] =?windows-1252?q?=91=3A=3A=3A=92_call?=
Paul Gilbert