Hi, thanks, Uwe and Jari, for your helpful comments! Indeed, I forgot the "..." argument. R did not exactly say what was wrong. It just said:
* checking S3 generic/method consistency ... WARNING predict: function(object, ...) predict.systemfit: function(object, data, se.fit, se.pred, interval, level) and I wrongly assumed that "data, se.fit, se.pred, interval" shouldn't be there rather than that "..." was missing. Thanks again, Arne On Tuesday 16 March 2004 11:14, Jari Oksanen wrote: > Arne, > > Are you sure that R warns about extra variables, or does it warn about > missing parameter "..."? > > The syntax of the generic is > > predict(object, ...) > > and both these should be in your function. You should have "..." even if > you do not pass any extra parameters to other functions (been there, > seen that). > > cheers, jari oksanen > > On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 11:39, Arne Henningsen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I added a new function "predict.systemfit" to our package "systemfit" to > > make it closer to other packages (e.g. lm). Now "R CMD check" complains > > that the generic function "predict" has only the argument "object", while > > our function "predict.systemfit" has more arguments. However, the > > function "predict.lm" has also more arguments and they are almost the > > same as in > > "predict.systemfit". Thus, I think that our way to specify > > "predict.systemfit" might be OK in spite of this warning. > > What should I do? Can I ignore this warning? > > What will Kurt answer when we submit it ;-) ? > > > > Best wishes, > > Arne -- Arne Henningsen Department of Agricultural Economics University of Kiel Olshausenstr. 40 D-24098 Kiel (Germany) Tel: +49-431-880 4445 Fax: +49-431-880 1397 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uni-kiel.de/agrarpol/ahenningsen/ ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
