Re: [R] conditional function definition?

[Spencer Graves]

Have you considered: 

> exists("slice.index")
[1] TRUE
      In other circumstances, I've tested various components of 
"version". 

hope this helps. 
spencer graves

(Ted Harding) wrote:

Hi Folks,

What is the best way to avoid a function being read in
anew (and masking an exiting function) when a definition
of it has already been established in R?
Reason: Fernando Tusell and I are working up Schafer's 'CAT'
for R (basically done now, just needs some cosmetic tidying up).
This uses a function 'slice.index', present in S but not in
the versions of R we were working with at the time. So we put
in a definition (copied from R-help ... ).
However, it seems that slice.index is now in "base" in latest
versions of R. So it would seem a bit silly to read it in anew.
Nevertheless, probably we should keep it in for the sake of people
still using older versions of R who would not have it.
So what's the best method to do

if( some test for function slice.index absent ) {
 slice.index<-function(....){....}
}
??

Thanks,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 167 1972
Date: 20-Sep-03                                       Time: 15:07:59
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
 

______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help