From Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch>  Wed Oct 21 07:47:16 1998
From: Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch> (Martin Maechler)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:47:16 +0200
Subject: anovalist.lm  or  anova.lmlist?
Message-ID: <199810210647.IAA21798@sophie.ethz.ch>


In R, we currently have  the functions
	anovalist.lm
and	anova.glmlist

S / S-plus has  
	anova.lmlist
	anova.glmlist

On the other hand, the  [n]lme  package (library) of Doug Bates and Jose
Pinheiro has an "lmList" class  and  an  anova.lmList(.) method for that.

We are considering to use

	anovalist.lm
and	anovalist.glm

instead of the  S/S-plus names mentioned above.
These functions are probably never called from top-level by a user
(they *are* called by  anova.lm(.) & anova.glm()).

Doug Bates says
  DB> The name anovalist.lm makes sense in that the method dispatch is on
  DB> only the first object which has a class of "lm" or "glm" or ...  If
  DB> there was an anovalist generic it would be even more consistent.  The
  DB> name anova.lmlist looks like the name of a method but I don't think it
  DB> is treated that way.


Your opinions?

Do you know of S- or R- code (outside or  "R base") which 
call  anova.[g]lmlist directly ?
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


anovalist.lm or anova.lmlist?
Martin Maechler