From simon.urbanek at math.uni-augsburg.de  Tue Dec 14 16:16:52 2004
From: simon.urbanek at math.uni-augsburg.de (Simon Urbanek)
Date: Tue Dec 14 16:16:49 2004
Subject: Hooks, docs [was [Rd] Multiple options for a package]
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412141203080.8509@gannet.stats>
References: <6.0.1.1.2.20041214112754.03703ec0@stat4ux.stat.ucl.ac.be>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0412141203080.8509@gannet.stats>
Message-ID: <2EE026CB-4DE3-11D9-B766-000D93AE1C66@math.uni-augsburg.de>

Brian,

thanks for the useful hints! In fact, that code features several 
interesting techniques.
While reading one of the related docs I stumbled upon a slight problem 
in the UserHooks {base} docs:

pkgname character string: the package/namespace name. If versioned 
install has been used, pkgname should the unversioned name of the 
package and any version information will be stripped.

The last sentence doesn't make too much sense to me - either there's a 
verb missing after the "should" or it should go away altogether 
(depending on what was really meant ...) or there's a better way to put 
it...

... and since we're talking about hooks - is there some standard as of 
what custom hook names should look like? Or maybe the hook parameters? 
(I noticed the one used in grid doesn't supply any parameters at 
all...) And finally how should hooks be documented (or the other way 
round - how does one look for hook documentation)?

Thanks,
Simon

On Dec 14, 2004, at 8:30 AM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:

> I also don't see why you need to save options to file _within a 
> session_, and the R testing framework does not do so -- take a look at 
> what massage-examples does.  But if you do save options, remember that 
> some are read-only.  I think you would find .readRDS and allies (see 
> the help page) more convenient.


Hooks, docs [was [Rd] Multiple options for a package]
Simon Urbanek