Re: [Rd] Suggestion: Not having to export .conflicts.OK in name spaces

From: Martin Maechler <>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:57:59 +0100

>>>>> "SF" == Seth Falcon <> >>>>> on Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:47:17 -0700 writes:

    SF> On 3/17/10 9:11 AM, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
>> Currently library() and attach() fail to locate an
>> existing '.conflicts.OK' in a package wit name space,
>> unless it is exported. Since there should be little
>> interest in exporting '.conflicts.OK' otherwise, one may
>> argue that those methods should look for '.conflicts.OK'
>> even if it is not exported.

    SF> I guess I agree that there is no real value in forcing     SF> .conflicts.OK to be exported.
so do I.

    SF> OTOH, this seems like a dubious feature to begin. When     SF> is it a good idea to use it?

in cases, the package author thinks (s)he knows what (s)he is doing;
e.g. in the case of Matrix, I could argue that I know about the current conflicts, and I would *not* want the users of my
package be intimidated by warnings about maskings...


    SF> + seth

    SF> -- Seth Falcon | @sfalcon |

    SF> ______________________________________________
    SF> mailing list     SF> mailing list Received on Mon 22 Mar 2010 - 11:11:10 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Mon 22 Mar 2010 - 17:01:13 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.

list of date sections of archive