From sfalcon at fhcrc.org  Wed Oct 18 22:29:23 2006
From: sfalcon at fhcrc.org (Seth Falcon)
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:29:23 -0700
Subject: [Rd] Caching bug with showMethods?
In-Reply-To: <45367428.9040606@r-project.org> (John Chambers's message of "Wed,
	18 Oct 2006 14:36:24 -0400")
References: <m2ac3uv954.fsf@ziti.local> <45362CA9.4050803@r-project.org>
	<m2zmbtsnm3.fsf@ziti.local> <45367428.9040606@r-project.org>
Message-ID: <m2d58pid0c.fsf@ziti.local>

John Chambers <jmc at r-project.org> writes:
> If showMethods() were extended in this way but consistent with its
> behavior now, you would potentially get a mess (and do a lot of
> computation).  Any method with "ANY" in any element of its signature
> qualifies (in particular, all default methods).  And if you said
> inherited=TRUE, but did NOT give a limiting class---!
>
> I think the definition you want is to find all methods for which one
> of the superclasses of "B" appears explicitly in a signature, but
> excluding "ANY" from the superclasses used.  That's quite a different
> (and longer) calculation than showMethods() does, but could indeed be
> useful.

Yes, I think excluding "ANY", but including "B" and any of its
superclasses is what would be most useful.  I realize it will take
longer to compute, but I do think it would be a useful tool.

+ seth




[Rd] Caching bug with showMethods?
Seth Falcon