>> Hadley Wickham <had...@rice.edu>
>> on Wed, 29 Aug 2012 12:16:15 -0500 wrote:
> I was thinking more that instead of
> roxy_env_inspector <- new.env(parent = emptyenv())
> roxy_env_inspector[["S3"]] <- ...
> roxy_env_inspector[["S4"]] <- ...
> you'd do
> setClass("RoxyInspector")
> setClass("S4RoxyInspector", contains = c("RoxyInspector"))
> setMethod("inspector", signature("S4RoxyInspector"), ...)
> setClass("S3RoxyInspector", contains = c("RoxyInspector"))
> setMethod("inspector", signature("S3RoxyInspector"), ...)
> and then retrieve all the inspectors by using a S4 introspection
> function to get all children of RoxyInspector.
:D
I see. Use S4 for a storage. Well, a bit to fancy for me ;).
As an alternative you can just provide a function
roxy_register_detector(fun) which would just store fun in an environment
in roxy namespace. Simple, and everyone understands what happens.
>> Whatever the textual representation by which object X is generated X <-
>> new(..), or X <- X.constructor(), or createObjectX(), or X <- eval(...)
>> will always have the same result. It is much easier for the end user,
>> who is not forced to use a specific declaration for roxygen to work. All
>> what matters is the end object(s) which the code generate.
> Ok, agreed. If you can do it, I'll happy include the code :)
Yep, hopefully this weekend.
Vitalie.
_______________________________________________
Roxygen-devel mailing list
Roxygen-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org
https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/roxygen-devel
