It's worth actually reading the list you post to ... http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Reference-classes-assignments-to-fields-td3708168.html
On Aug 5, 2011, at 6:41 AM, Jon Clayden wrote: > Dear all, > > I've just had a package update bounced from CRAN because of a recent > change in R-devel which seems to affect the behaviour of the > initFields() reference class method. (The change must be very recent > because I tested the package on a week-old build of R-devel.) It seems > that the method no longer coerces its arguments to the expected type > of each field. For a simple example: > >> Foo <- setRefClass("Foo", fields=list(number="integer"), >> methods=list(initialize=function (number = NULL) initFields(number=number))) >> Foo$new() > Error in function (value) : > invalid replacement for field ‘number’, should be from class > “integer” or a subclass (was class “NULL”) > > (This used to work, with "number" being set to "integer(0)"). In fact > it is now extremely strict, not even allowing a double literal which > is equal to an integer: > >> Foo$new(number=1) > Error in function (value) : > invalid replacement for field ‘number’, should be from class > “integer” or a subclass (was class “numeric”) > > I don't see anything about this in the NEWS, so I was wondering if I > could get clarification on whether this is now the intended behaviour, > before I further modify the package. I must say that this will be a > bit of a pain to "correct"... > > All the best, > Jon > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > > ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel