> callGeneric is an advanced topic.
Ok, when I will be older :-)
>> *************************
>> This works :
>>
>> setMethod("initialize","B",
>> function(.Object,..., yValue){
>> callNextMethod(.Object, ..., y=yValue)
>> return(.Object)
>> })
>> new("B",yValue=3)
>>
>> but this does not :
>>
>> setMethod("initialize","B",
>> function(.Object, yValue){
>> callNextMethod(.Object, y=yValue)
>> return(.Object)
>> })
>> new("B",yValue=3)
>>
>> Why ?
>> Is there any help page about ... ?
>
> Both 'work' in the sense that an object is returned
Well yes, but the second one does return an object without assigning
the value 3, that is not realy working...
> In an object-oriented sense, initialize,B-method should really just
> deal with it's own slots; it shouldn't have to 'know' about either
> classes that it extends (A) or classes that extend it. And it
> shouldn't do work that inherited methods (i.e.,
> initialize,ANY-method) do.
I get your point and I agree : I am developing B, you are developing A,
I do not want to know what is in A so B should not initialize its 'A
part'
On the other hand, I do not like the "..." . "..." can be anything,
there is no controle at all, no type checking.
I would prefers to initialize B giving its value for its own slot AND
an object class A. So I send you the value for A, you send me an objets
'aaa' of class A then I initialize B with some value and aaa. This way,
B keep its role but does not transmit anythink to A without controling
it.
Best,
Christophe
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ce message a ete envoye par IMP, grace a l'Universite Paris 10 Nanterre
______________________________________________
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.
