[R-pkg-devel] need some help to understand package build workflow

Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com
Fri Jul 31 23:45:24 CEST 2015

On 31/07/2015 7:11 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> It seems arguable that this is actually a roxygen bug - the function
> that's actually exported from the package does not have a type
> argument.

The package fails R CMD check because of a bad .Rd file.  If a user had
written that file, it would be user error, but roxygen2 wrote it, so I'd
say it's pretty clearly a roxygen2 bug.

Duncan Murdoch

> Hadley
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Kevin Ushey <kevinushey at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've posted an MRE at https://github.com/klutometis/roxygen/issues/362.
>> The issue occurs when a function and an S4 generic have the same name;
>> I imagine this is fairly uncommon? Wouldn't the function be masked by
>> the S4 generic and effectively be invisible after the package was
>> loaded?
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Hadley Wickham <h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 30, 2015, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 30/07/2015 9:14 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>>>> On 30/07/2015 8:49 PM, Glenn Schultz wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> I have a package stable and working.  Now, I am trying to consolidate
>>>> some functions that share similar inputs.  Example below.  So, I branched
>>>> on github and work with the branch but now when I run the R check in studio
>>>> I get the following warning:
>>>>>> * checking Rd \usage sections ... WARNING
>>>>>> Documented arguments not in \usage in documentation object
>>>> 'Effective.Measure':
>>>>>>   ‘type’
>>>>>> Clearly type is documented.  Perhaps this is an R studio/git hub issue.
>>>> Travis tells me the build is broken.  I am trying to build and work with
>>>> the package within standards so I am not sure what happened.   Maybe this
>>>> is not a topic that belongs here but I can't find answers on the internet.
>>>>> No, it's not clear that type is documented.  You're only showing us the
>>>>> .R file, not the .Rd file that Roxygen (?) produced from it.
>>>> Discussion went private for a few emails, so to finish this thread here:
>>>> Turns out roxygen2 was generating a bad .Rd file, so this is a roxygen2
>>>> bug.
>>>> I'd really appreciate it if someone would file a bug on this.
>>> Hadley
>>> --
>>> http://had.co.nz/
>>>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-package-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list