Thanks, Duncan, for your reply. You are right, the () in my code are not
correct. Maybe my problem is that I do not really understand the exact
effect of this dot . I have no tried with the following file in my /R
folder in the package:
mainfunction<- function(x) {
x2 <- .subfunction1(x)
x3 <- .subfunction2(x2)
x3
}
.subfunction1<- function(x) {
x*2
}
.subfunction2<- function(x) {
x*2
}
After I build the package and load it into R an run (for example):
mainfunction(2)
I get 8, which indicates that the functions are working. The reason that
made me believe beforehand that the code is not working is that when I
type the following to see the code of the function:
.subfunction1
or run:
.subfunction1(2)
I get an error that the object .subfunction1 can not be found. Is this
the desired effect of adding the dot to the function name? Or do I do
something wrong here?
Thanks
Jannis
On 09/06/2011 04:46 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 11-09-06 10:26 AM, Jannis wrote:
Dear list members,
i have build a package which contains a collection of my frequently
used functions. To keep the code organized I have broken down some
rather extensive and long functions into individual steps and bundled
these steps in sub-functions that are called inside the main function.
To keep an overview over which sub-function belongs to which main
function I saved all the respective sub-functions to the same *.R
file as their main-function and gave them names beginning with . to
somehow hide the sub-functions. The result would be one *.R file
in<package>/R for each 'main-function' containing something like:
mainfunction<- function() {
.subfunction1()
.subfunction2()
#...
}
.subfunction1()<- function() {
#do some stuff
}
.subfunction2()<- function() {
#do some more stuff
}
According to the way I understood the "Writing R Extensions" Manual I
expected this to work. When I load the package, however, I get the
error message that the sub-functions could not be found. Manually
sourcing all files in the<package>/R directory however yields the
expected functionality.
In what way am I mistaken here? Any ideas?
Those definitions of .subfunction1 and .subfunction2 are not
syntactically correct: extra parens. If that's just a typo in the
message, then you'll have to show us real code. What you describe
should work.
Duncan Murdoch
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
