> Barry Rowlingson
> on Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:23:46 + writes:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Hadley Wickham
wrote:
>> I've found that it's a very bad idea to provide length or names
>> methods for just this reason.
well, not quite, see below ..
>>> After lookin
After toying around with trying some of the suggested fixes, I have to
agree that it's more trouble than it is worth to add my own primitive
methods. It'll work just fine to move on and write my own methods. Thanks
to all for the explanations and suggestions.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Barry
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> I've found that it's a very bad idea to provide length or names
> methods for just this reason.
>> After looking
>> for memory leaks and other errors I finally noticed that the str() on the
>> object of myClass looked odd. It returned somet
I've found that it's a very bad idea to provide length or names
methods for just this reason.
Hadley
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Nathan Wendt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have run into an issue while developing an R package. Specifically, my
> issue relates to what happens when I define an S3 lengt
Hi Nathan,
Perhaps if you defined your "length" object as "nbm" (number of binary
messages), it would not interfere with the default "length".
Jim
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Georgi Boshnakov <
georgi.boshna...@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >I have run into an issue while developing a
Hi,
>I have run into an issue while developing an R package. Specifically, my issue
>relates to what happens when I define an S3 length
>method for my class. Here is my basic setup:
># Here is the structure of myClass
># uses an externalptr to operate on file using some C functions list(file =
