[Rd] What is preferable - a single large package or a few smaller packages?
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Thu May 30 10:01:14 CEST 2013
On 29/05/2013 23:38, Peter Langfelder wrote:
> Hi all,
> I maintain the WGCNA package which at present has nearly 200
> functions. In the future there will be more. Curious whether it would
> be preferable or useful to split the package into a couple different
> ones with different aims. Obviously, when one calls a function in R,
> package name spaces have to be traversed to find the matching name -
> does the speed of this depend on how functions are partitioned into
> packages? Any other considerations? My knowledge of R internals in
> this regard is pretty non-existent - thanks for any pointers.
Namespace environments are hashed, so essentially lookup is independent
of size. And since lazy-loading the memory footprint depends far more
on what has been used in the session than the number of functions.
In any case, 200 functions is not a 'large' package. 'stats' has nearly
1100 in its namespace .... Performance for really large packages was
improved to the point of a being a non-issue before 2.0.0.
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
More information about the R-devel