On 13/06/13 03:34, Bryan Hanson wrote:
<SNIP>
So this warning from check is not a problem in the long run:
* checking for missing documentation entries ... WARNING
Undocumented code objects:
‘ang0to2pi’ ‘dAB’ ‘doBoxesIntersect’ ...
All user-level objects in a package should have documentation entries.
if I understand correctly. I guess the reason I didn't find any documentation
is the wide lattitude which is possible.
I think you *might* get flak about the warnings if you submit your package
to CRAN. I find such warnings annoying, anyhow.
To avoid them you can create a *.Rd file listing all the undocumented
functions
in your package with an alias for the name of each such function and a
"usage" line for each such function. Only a mild pain in the pohutukawa,
and it only needs to be done once. (Possibly with some updating if new
undocumented functions are added to the package.)
The *.Rd file can be called anything you like (as long as it ends in
".Rd" and
doesn't conflict with other *.Rd filled. However a fairly common convention
is to name the file "melvin-internal.Rd" where "melvin" is the name of your
package.
cheers,
Rolf Turner
______________________________________________
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.
