Sorry, clicked send too soon! > It could find 'stats::' if it looked at
> body(getNamespace(<pkg>)$DataProcessor$public_methods$filter_data)[[3]][[3]][[1]] Is there a reason why it doesn't do this? Is it just for computational reasons? Best regards, Bjarke Den tors. 12. feb. 2026 kl. 23.53 skrev Michael Chirico < [email protected]>: > R6 is a _build-time_ dependency for your package. It may be possible for a > user without R6 installed to run your package without issue from the built > tarball. R today doesn't really have a concept of a build-time dependency > in the DESCRIPTION > > 'stats' is more of a false positive -- {codetools} simply doesn't know how > to check the R6 object DataProcessor (which it sees as an environment and > doesn't walk completely). It could find 'stats::' if it looked at > > > body(getNamespace(<pkg>)$DataProcessor$public_methods$filter_data)[[3]][[3]][[1]] > > Anyway, Dirk's advice is correct: you can just add the entries to your > NAMESPACE: > > importFrom(R6, R6class) > importFrom(stats, filter) > > Once that's done, you can choose whether to continue namespace-qualifying > the calls inside the sources. > > You could also explore if just putting the packages in Suggests, not > Imports, works. > > Mike C > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 2:33 PM Dirk Eddelbuettel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 12 February 2026 at 15:52, Bjarke Hautop wrote: >> | Hi all, >> | >> | R CMD check gives a false positive locally when the only usage of an >> | imported package is through pkg::foo() inside an R6 class. This GitHub >> repo >> | contains a full MWE, with log files and a more elaborate explanation: >> | https://github.com/BjarkeHautop/RCMDcheckFalsePositive >> | >> | The R package contains a single .R file with this (I'm aware you don't >> have >> | to import base packages explicitly, but this is an MWE with only base >> | packages (except R6)): >> | >> | filter <- function() { >> | message("This is a custom filter function.") >> | } >> | >> | DataProcessor <- R6::R6Class( >> | "DataProcessor", >> | public = list( >> | data = NULL, >> | initialize = function(data) self$data <- data, >> | >> | filter_data = function(data) { >> | filter() >> | self$data <- stats::filter(self$data, rep(1, 3)) >> | } >> | ) >> | ) >> | >> | When running R CMD check, it will generate the following NOTE: >> | >> | * checking dependencies in R code ... NOTE >> | Namespaces in Imports field not imported from: >> | ‘R6’ ‘stats’ >> >> Thanks for posting a full and complete example! From a quick glance your >> problem may be that while you DO have the the packages in DESCRIPTION you >> DO NOT import them in NAMESPACE. The error message could arguably be more >> explicit but that seems to be the case here. >> >> Hope this helps, Dirk >> >> | Interestingly, the NOTE disappears on CRAN release/dev winbuilder. >> | >> | My questions are: >> | >> | 1. Is this the intended behavior of R CMD check, or is it a bug that it >> | fails to detect usage of packages inside >> | R6 classes? If intended (e.g., due to it being too expensive to check >> for >> | :: in "hidden places") should this be >> | mentioned somewhere on WRE? Currently >> | [WRE]( >> | >> https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-devel/R-exts.html#Package-Dependencies-1 >> ) >> | says: >> | *"The ‘Imports’ field should not contain packages which are not imported >> | from (via the NAMESPACE file or :: or ::: operators)"* >> | indicating that `::` usage should be fully supported. >> | >> | 2. How/Why does the NOTE disappear when checking on CRAN dev winbuilder? >> | Can I replicate this behavior locally using R CMD check? Will it pass on >> | CRAN? >> | >> | Best regards, >> | Bjarke >> | >> | [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> | >> | ______________________________________________ >> | [email protected] mailing list >> | https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> >> -- >> dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | [email protected] >> >> ______________________________________________ >> [email protected] mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
