Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-11-23 Thread Richard Cotton
Yes, you do need at least a token about of documentation in both packages. I keep full documentation in the package where they originate, and minimal documentation in the rexporting package. The roxygen code in the reexporting package looks like this: #' Some function #' #' See

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-11-16 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 16/11/2015 4:00 AM, Richard Cotton wrote: On 22 October 2015 at 22:55, Duncan Murdoch wrote: I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many people won't need it, I'd like

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-11-16 Thread Thierry Onkelinx
Roxygen2 documents imported and re-exported functions. See http://www.r-bloggers.com/roxygen2-5-0-0/ Best regards, ir. Thierry Onkelinx Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature and Forest team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / team Biometrics & Quality Assurance

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-11-16 Thread Richard Cotton
On 22 October 2015 at 22:55, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, but > it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many people won't > need it, I'd like to make the new parts optional. > Can

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-25 Thread Henrik Bengtsson
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Paul Gilbert wrote: > > > On 10/22/2015 03:55 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: >> >> I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, >> but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many >> people won't need

[Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-23 Thread ProfJCNash
with any elegance. JN On 15-10-23 06:00 AM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:55:01 -0400 > From: Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> > To: "R-devel@r-project.org" <r-devel@r-project.org> > Subject: [Rd] Bes

[Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-22 Thread Duncan Murdoch
I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many people won't need it, I'd like to make the new parts optional. The general idea I'm thinking of is to put the new stuff into a separate package, and have

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-22 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 22 October 2015 at 15:08, Brian G. Peterson wrote: | On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 15:55 -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote: | > I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, | > but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many | > people won't need it, I'd like

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-22 Thread Brian G. Peterson
On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 15:55 -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, > but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many > people won't need it, I'd like to make the new parts optional. > > The general idea I'm

Re: [Rd] Best way to implement optional functions?

2015-10-22 Thread Paul Gilbert
On 10/22/2015 03:55 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: I'm planning on adding some new WebGL functionality to the rgl package, but it will pull in a very large number of dependencies. Since many people won't need it, I'd like to make the new parts optional. The general idea I'm thinking of is to put