Ah, thanks, now I understand the mode of operation and will work on a more robust fix than exporting the functions.

Regards, Ulrike

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Uwe Ligges <ligges@statistik.tu-dortmund.de> 
To: Ulrike Grömping <groemp@beuth-hochschule.de> 
Cc: r-devel@r-project.org 
Sent: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:19:59 +0100 
Subject: Re: [Rd] Registered S3 methods not found: Documentation bug or anomaly in function update or ... ?

> Well, 
> 
> > swiss.lm 
> 
> Call: 
> lm.default(formula = Fertility ~ Education + Examination, data = swiss) 
> 
> That means the call is registered as lm.default and update calls that 
> one (and it is hidden in your namespace. 
> 
> You can fix it on your side so that the call is registered as lm(.....) 
> in the lm object. 
> 
> Anyway, I think it is a bit dangerous to redefine lm() the way you did it. 
> 
> Best wishes, 
> Uwe 
> 
> Ulrike Grömping wrote: 
> > Dear expeRts, 
> > 
> > I recently asked for help on an issue with S3 methods for lm. The issue 
> > was (in DoE.base 0.9-4) 
> > that function update from package stats would return an error whenever 
> > DoE.base was loaded, 
> > complaining that lm.default was not found 
> > (e.g. 
> > require(DoE.base) 
> > swiss.lm <- lm(Fertility~Education+Examination, swiss) 
> > upd.swiss.lm <- update(swiss.lm, .~.-Examination) 
> > ). 
> > 
> > In version 0.9-4 of DoE.base, I had followed the recommendations of 
> > Section 1.6.2 of "Writing R 
> > extensions", exporting the generic function lm and registering the 
> > methods (lm.design and lm.default) 
> > with S3method but not separately exporting them in the namespace file. 
> > Not having received help fast, I decided to try to explicitly export the 
> > method functions 
> > lm.design and lm.default. This did in fact remove the 
> > issue with not finding lm.default when using function update, and I have 
> > uploaded this fixed version 
> > as 0.9-5. 
> > 
> > Is it generally advisable to also export the method functions (i.e. 
> > should section 
> > 1.6.2 of "Writing R extensions" be revised) ? Or is there an anomaly in 
> > function update ? Or ...? 
> > Explanations are appreciated. 
> > 
> > Thanks and regards, Ulrike 
> > 
------- End of Original Message -------
 

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

