[Bioc-devel] R6 and Bioconductor

[Michael Lawrence]

Just to add to what Gabe already said, defer your performance concerns
until you've actually got something that works and is well written. If
you hit up against a performance barrier, come back and we can help.

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Garth Ilsley <garth.ilsley at oist.jp> wrote:
> Thank you.
>
>> One place where one might think of using R6 is in the implementation of a mutable data model underlying a GUI like a Shiny app. > If mutable semantics are required, consider using S4 reference classes, as they offer more features than R6 and will integrate
>> directly with Bioconductor S4 classes.
>
> If I understand correctly, you are saying that it is fine to use Reference classes (mutable semantics) in Bioconductor. A GUI is one clear place for this. However, what about a large dataset that is subject to progressive analysis with various fields updated as the analysis proceeds? The typical Bioconductor approach (as far as I have seen) is to call a method defined for an S4 functional class that produces a new object of the same class, with the result assigned to the same name as the original object.  For a project considered in isolation, it wouldn't be unreasonable to use a Reference class for this instead, but that's not what I'm asking. My question is about the standards and approach that Bioconductor has agreed on - to ensure consistency. Is a Reference Class permissible in this situation? If not, case closed. If they are permitted, I would suggest that R6 semantics are consistent with Reference Class semantics, but with the added benefit of private members and "active bindi
>  ngs" (they look like fields, but call a function). This is nice and simple (for the creator and user of the class), but if not desired (for consistency etc.), then I presume Reference Classes will do fine.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel