Well, it's an interesting idea, and the current implementation would fit
with it.
One catch is that it goes against any obvious notion of checking for
valid objects (admittedly, there are some difficulties in that already
with active bindings being used).
Another issue is that in normal R programming practice, your "template"
class would be in a package, in a namespace, and therefore locked.
Conceptually at least, one would not be allowed to modify that definition.
Both these issues would be solved by using subclasses for the
extensions, which seems more in the spirit of R. Seems like you could
hide the subclass details from your users if you wanted to.
So, something to think about, but the use case isn't convincing yet.
John
On 11/21/10 2:18 PM, Janko Thyson wrote:
Hi there,
is it possible to register fields as you can register methods with
getRefClass("Classname")$methods(.)?
I know that you should usually give some thought on which fields you need
and hardcode them in the class def. But I'm playing around with dynamically
creating/extending sort of a template class that already offers basic
functionality shared by all objects that "inherit" from that class. If I
follow the usual inheritance paradigm I would have to actually define those
new "subclasses" and let them inherit from the superclass (contains
argument(, right? But can I get around that by sort of registering new
fields? Maybe with 'initFields(.)'?
Thanks for any info on that,
Janko
##### SYSTEM INFO #####
Windows XP SP3
R 2.12.0
Eclipse 3.6.1 (Helios)
StatET 0.9.1
#####################
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
