Às 08:20 de 11/08/2023, Sigbert Klinke escreveu:
Hello,
I have defined a function 'equations(...)' which returns an object with
class 'equations'. I also defined a function 'print.equations' which
prints the object. But I did not use 'equations <- function(x, ...)
UseMethod("equations"). Two questions:
1.) Is this a sensible approach?
2.) If yes, are there any pitfalls I could run in later?
Thanks
Sigbert
Hello,
You have to ask yourself what kind of objects are you passing to
'equations(...)'?
Do you need to have
'equations.double(...)'
'equations.character(...)'
'equations.formula(...)'
'equations.matrix(...)'
[...]
specifically written for objects of class
numeric
character
formula
matrix
[...]
respectively?
These methods would act on the respective class, process those objects
somewhat differently because they are of different classes and output an
object of class "equation".
(If so, it is recommended to write a 'equations.default(...)' too.)
Methods such as print.equation or summary.equation are written when you
want your new class to have functionality your new class' users are
familiar with.
If, for instance, autoprint is on as it frequently is, users can see
their "equation" by typing its name at a prompt. print.equation would
display the "equation" in a way relevant to that new class.
But this does not mean that the function that *creates* the object needs
to be generic, you only need a new generic to have methods processing
inputs of different classes in ways specific to those classes.
Hope this helps,
Rui Barradas
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.
