On 03/09/2013 1:02 PM, Yihui Xie wrote:
But "don't use those packages that cause you trouble" implies you will have to reinvent and maintain all the wheels by yourself?
Isn't that a better alternative than having examples that don't work?
What I do for long/complicated/time-consuming examples is I move them to package websites or separate repositories. For example, I started to use Vistat to show examples of the animation package (e.g. I write http://vis.supstat.com/2013/04/buffons-needle/ in the References in ?buffon.needle), and the knitr-examples repository (https://github.com/yihui/knitr-examples) to serve as both a testing repository and a learning repository. In these cases, it will reduce the check time on CRAN, and I'll know potential problems before CRAN's ticket comes. Of course, example(foo) won't show the long examples any more, but I believe it is worth it, since you gain more: you can make websites more visually pleasant than Rd (R documentation), you can show output so users do not really have to open R and run example(foo), and you have comments/interactivity/Google Analytics, etc... Rd is an excellent format for documenting function arguments and showing quick examples, though.
As a user, I'd rather have examples like the ones you are discussing above as vignettes in the package, so that I can use them while offline, and so that I can have some assurance that they are tested. As a package author, I'm not so sure: it is certainly more work to produce a vignette than to produce a web page, but the automatic testing is a good thing. I don't like having my name on documents that give bad advice, and the CRAN checks detect some of that.
Duncan Murdoch
Regards, Yihui -- Yihui Xie <xieyi...@gmail.com> Web: http://yihui.name Department of Statistics, Iowa State University 2215 Snedecor Hall, Ames, IA On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/09/2013 10:49 AM, Kevin Wright wrote: >> >> I have a package with more than 100 datasets, each of which has an >> \examples{} section. On the plus side, these example test the "R >> ecosystem" to make sure that everything is working (both my package and >> others' packages). On the down side, changes in this ecosystem have >> caused >> repeated NOTEs and WARNINGs from CRAN. >> >> As a commentary on one recent R-help discussion, none of the code >> breakages >> have been caused by use of ":::". All of the problems have been caused by >> (1) Changes in "stable" packages and (2) changing CRAN requirements (3) >> changes in "beta" packages. In roughly that order. >> >> In the interest of long-term package stability I'm thinking about wrapping >> more of the examples in my package in \dontrun{}. Especially the parts >> that depend on other packages. >> >> I'm interested to know how other package developers approach this problem. >> > As a user of your package, I would find it irritating if example(foo) didn't > run anything. It would be more irritating (and would indicate sloppiness > on your part) if the examples failed when I cut and pasted them. These both > suggest leaving the examples running. > > As the author of your package, it sounds as though you find it quite > irritating when other authors break your code. > > Isn't the right solution to this to work with the other package authors to > come up with code that is unlikely to break? If that's not possible, then > maybe don't use those packages that cause you trouble. > > Duncan Murdoch
______________________________________________ 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.
