[R] Roxygen vs Sweave for S4 documentation

[Tobias Verbeke]

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Douglas Bates<bates at stat.wisc.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Martin
> Maechler<maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote:
>>>>>>> "TobiasV" == Tobias Verbeke <tobias.verbeke at openanalytics.be>
>>>>>>>     on Sun, 21 Jun 2009 08:25:07 +0200 writes:
>>
>>    TobiasV> Hi Ken,
>>    >> I have been using R for a while.  Recently, I have begun converting my
>>    >> package into S4 classes.  I was previously using Rdoc for documentation.
>>    >> Now, I am looking to use the best tool for S4 documentation.  It seems that
>>    >> the best choices for me are Roxygen and Sweave (I am fine with tex).
>>    >>
>>    >> Are there any users of Roxygen or Sweave who can comment on the strengths or
>>    >> weaknesses of one or othe other?  Thanks in advance.
>>
>>    TobiasV> For the moment proper documentation of S4 classes (with a @slot tag
>>    TobiasV> e.g.) is not implemented yet,
>>
>> how did you define "proper" here?
>>
>> I know that the result of  promptClass()  may not always be
>> perfect. As most things are not perfect,
>> I would not quickly call this improper ...
>>
>> Or is using *.Rd  not proper for you,
>> as it does not have all of code + docs in one file?
>
> I think Tobias was referring to Roxygen support for S4 classes, not
> the existence of .Rd tags.

Yes, I was just referring to the Roxygen support and as a matter of
fact I recommended Roxygen to mimick the nice job done by promptClass
a while ago

https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/roxygen-devel/2009-February/000023.html

No intent to criticize nor current Rd tags nor Rd as a documentation system,
although having code + docs in one file (as in Roxygen) seems to be convenient
to some.

Best,
Tobias