On 13-08-24 12:46 PM, Kasper Daniel Hansen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Peter Meilstrup Using ::: on a package you
don't control can be more dangerous. For a
package author to choose to export a function to the public interface
represents at least some assurance that that interface will be stable or
slow-moving. But there are no implied assurances about how code in the
private namespace might change behind the scenes. I might completely
refactor the code and change the behavior of any private function between
0.0.1 releases, but I would not do that for exported functions.
This is true (that it could be dangerous), but sometimes, as a package
author, I am willing to take this risk. Personally, I don't do this
lightly, but sometimes there is no way around it, particular if the hidden
function does some magic in its own NAMESPACE. It is not all functions
that one can just easily copy over into you own package.
It is fine to say that the use of ::: should be discouraged, it is another
thing if it prevents you from submitting to CRAN (which I don't know for
sure; I thought that Notes were ok?).
CRAN is a good place to send your packages because it does some quality
control on the packages it accepts. As I said in my message to Yihui,
if you think the test is wrong, you can argue about that and it might be
changed, but if you can't convince the CRAN maintainers of the validity
of your point, you shouldn't send your package there. There are plenty
of other places (github, R-forge, etc.) where you can distribute it.
Duncan Murdoch
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
