Thanks Duncan... Silly me, it's section 1.6.1 not version 1.6.1!
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. Thank you. Bryan On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:57 AM, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/06/2013 10:44 AM, Bryan Hanson wrote: >> [previously posted on Stack Overflow: >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17034309/hiding-undocumented-functions-in-a-package-use-of-function-name >> ] >> >> I've got some functions I need to make available in a package, and I don't >> want to export them or write much documentation for them. I'd just hide them >> inside another function but they need to be available to several functions >> so doing it that way becomes a scoping and maintenance issue. What is the >> right way to do this? By that I mean do they need special names, do they go >> somewhere other than the R subdirectory, can I put them in a single file, >> etc? I've checked out the manuals (e.g. Writing R Extensions 1.6.1), and >> what I'm after is like the .internals concept in the core, but I don't see >> any instructions about how to do this generally. >> >> For example, if I have functions foo1 and foo2 in a file foofunc.R, and >> these are intended for internal use only, should they be called foo1 or >> .foo1? And the file that holds them, should it be .foofunc.R or >> foofunc-internals? What should the Rd look like, or do I even need one? >> >> I know people do this in packages all the time and I feel like I've seen >> this somewhere, but I can't find any resources just now. Perhaps a >> suggestion of a package that does things this way which I could study would >> be sufficient. > > The best way to do this is simply not to export those functions in your > NAMESPACE file. If you want to use a naming convention > internally to remind yourself that those are private, you can do so, but R > doesn't force one on you, and there are no really popular conventions in use. > R won't complain if you don't document those functions at all. > > There may have been other advice in the version 1.6.1 manual, but that is > seriously out of date, more than 10 years old. I recommend that you update > to 3.0.1. > > 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.
