On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Liviu Andronic <landronim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marc Schwartz <marc_schwa...@me.com> wrote:
>> is.letter <- function(x) grepl("[[:alpha:]]", x)
>> is.number <- function(x) grepl("[[:digit:]]", x)
>>
> Quick follow-up question.
>
> I'm always reluctant to create functions that would resemble the
> method of a function (here, is() ), but would in fact not be a genuine
> method. So would there be any incompatibility between is() and
> is.letter(), given that the latter is not a method of the former?
> Is it good (or acceptable) practice to define is.letter() as above?
> Would is_letter() be better?It certainly won't cause problems if you never define anything of class "letter" or "number". > > Regards > Liviu > ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
