I am currently developing a plug-in for the R-Commander GUI. In this package I am using a great deal of other packages which I simply attached by using the Depends option in the description file.
I am however now switching them over to the Imports option and am experiencing some problems with it.
Because I want to use some functions not only internally in my own code, but also be able to print and use them in the script window of R Commander, I will also have to export them in the namespace.
Let's take for example the biclust package. This package has the following exports in its namespace:
# First a bunch of functions are exported (Note that the biclust function is not in here!)
export(drawHeatmap,drawHeatmap2,bubbleplot,...,heatmapBC)
# The classes are exported
exportClasses(BiclustMethod,Biclust,BCBimax,BCCC,BCXmotifs,BCSpectral,BCPlaid)
# Methods are exported
exportMethods(biclust,show,summary)
So when I library(biclust) in an R session, it works as intended, meaning I can use the biclust method/function in the R console.
Now this how my namespace file looks like (or at least the part of it relevant to this discussion)
# I select those functions I need and import them.
importFrom(biclust, drawHeatmap,...,biclustbarchart)
# I import all the classes
importClassesFrom(biclust,BiclustMethod,Biclust,BCBimax,BCCC,BCXmotifs,BCSpectral,BCPlaid)
# I import all the methods
importMethodsFrom(biclust,show,summary,biclust)
# I now export all of the previous again so I can use the doItAndPrint functionality in R Commander
export( drawHeatmap,...,biclustbarchart)
exportClasses(BiclustMethod,Biclust,BCBimax,BCCC,BCXmotifs,BCSpectral,BCPlaid)
exportMethods(biclust,show,summary)
However when I load in my own package now, it is not working as intended. While functions such as drawHeatmap are working, the biclust method/function can not be found.(Though I have clearly imported and exported the method.)
Seemingly the only way to get this working, is to put the biclust method also in the normal export() command.
export(biclust,drawHeatmap,...,biclustbarchart)
Could someone clarify what I am doing wrong or what is going on here? Why are the same exports working for the biclust package, but not for my own package?
The only description of your error is that "it is not working as intended", so the following is a little stab in the dark.
It's useful to distinguish between methods and the generics that they are associated with. Biclust makes available both, and they are tightly associated. importFrom(biclust, biclust) imports the generic and associated methods, importMethodsFrom(biclust, biclust) imports the biclust methods defined in the biclust package, and implicitly the generic(s) on which the methods are defined. These are functionally equivalent so far; I think the original intention of importMethodsFrom() was when pkgA defines a generic, pkgB defines methods on the generic, and pkgD wants to use the generic from pkgA and the methods on that generic defined in pkgA and pkgB -- import(pkgA, foo), importMethodsFrom(pkgB, foo).
On the other end, when you say exportMethods(foo), it instructs R to make foo methods defined in your package available for others to use. But there are no foo methods defined in your package, so nothing is exported (maybe this should generate an error, or the methods that you import should be exported again). On the other hand, export(foo) tells R to export the foo generic, which is available for export -- it's the symbol that you'd imported earlier. (You mention that you "put the biclust method also in the normal export()", but actually it is the generic (and any methods associated with it) available for export.) So exporting biclust, rather than methods defined on it, seems to be what you want to do.
Normally, I would say that importing and then re-exporting functions or generics defined in other packages is not the right thing to do -- biclust, not your package, provides and documents the generic, and biclust would probably belong in Depends: -- presumably, many other functions from biclust are typically used in conjunction with the generic. Perhaps your Rcommander GUI is an exception.
Even though Imports: implies additional work (in the NAMESPACE file), it is usually the case that packages belong as Imports: rather than Depends: -- it makes the code in your package much more robust (imported functions are found in the package name space, rather than on the search path that the user can easily modify) and reduces the likelihood that the user experiences name clashes between identical symbols defined in different packages.
Related
Currently I have in my package DESCRIPTION, a dependency on dbplyr:
Imports:
dbplyr,
dplyr
dbplyr is useful almost solely because of the S3 methods it defines: https://github.com/tidyverse/dbplyr/blob/main/NAMESPACE. The actual functions you call to use dbplyr are almost entirely from dplyr.
By putting dbplyr in my Imports, it should automatically get loaded, but not attached, which should be enough to register its S3 methods: https://r-pkgs.org/dependencies-mindset-background.html#sec-dependencies-attach-vs-load.
This seems to work fine, but whenever I R CMD check, it tells me:
N checking dependencies in R code (10.8s)
Namespace in Imports field not imported from: ‘dbplyr’
All declared Imports should be used.
Firstly, why does R CMD check even check this, considering that it often makes sense to load packages without importing them. Secondly, how am I supposed to satisfy R CMD check without loading things into my namespace that I don't want or need?
I am pretty sure two of your assumptions are false.
First, putting Imports: dbplyr into your DESCRIPTION file won't load it, so its methods won't be loaded from that alone. Basically the Imports field in the DESCRIPTION file just guarantees that dbplyr is available to be loaded when requested. If you import something via the NAMESPACE file, that will cause it to be loaded. If you evaluate dbplyr::something that will cause it to be loaded. Executing loadNamespace("dbplyr") is another way, and there are a few others. You may also load some other package that loads it.
Second, I think you have misinterpreted the error message. It isn't saying that you loaded it without importing it (though it would complain about that too), it is saying that it can't detect any use of it in your package, so maybe it shouldn't be a requirement for installing your package.
Unfortunately, the code to detect uses is fallible, so it sometimes misses uses. Examples I've heard about are:
if the package is only used in the default value for a function argument. This has been fixed in R-devel.
if the package is only used during the build to construct some object, e.g. code like someclass <- R6::R6Class( ... ) needs R6, but the check code won't see it because it looks at someclass, not at the source code that created it.
if the use of the package is hidden by specifying the name of the package in a character variable.
if the need for the package is indirect, e.g. you need to use ggplot2::geom_hex. That needs the hexbin package, but ggplot2 only declares it as "Suggested".
These examples come from this discussion: https://github.com/hadley/r-pkgs/issues/828#issuecomment-1421353457 .
The recommended workaround there is to create an object that refers to the imported package explicitly, e.g. putting the line
dummy_r6 <- function() R6::R6Class
into your package is enough to suppress the note without actually loading R6. (It will be loaded if you ever call this function.)
However, your requirement is stronger: you do need to make sure dbplyr is loaded if you want its methods to be used. I'd put something in your .onLoad() function that triggers the load. For example,
.onLoad <- function(lib, pkg) {
# Make sure the dbplyr methods are loaded
loadNamespace("dbplyr")
}
EDITED TO ADD: As pointed out in the comments, there's a bug in the check code that means it won't detect this as being a use of dbplyr. You really need to do both things, e.g.
.onLoad <- function(lib, pkg) {
# Make sure the dbplyr methods are loaded
loadNamespace("dbplyr")
# Work around bug in code checking in R 4.2.2 for use of packages
dummy <- function() dbplyr::across_apply_fns
}
The function used in the dummy construction is arbitrary; it probably doesn't even need to exist, but I chose one that does.
I'm writing a package that imports (and uses) both SparkR::sql and dbplyr::sql. The other relevant questions involve unintentional collisions brought on my haphazard importing.
In my NAMESPACE I have:
importFrom(dbplyr, sql)
importFrom(SparkR, sql)
Both of these functions are used in the script and, being aware of the conflict, I'm sure to always prefix the package name:
dbplyr::sql(...)
SparkR::sql(...)
Nevertheless, I get an import replacement warning when building/checking the package:
Warning: replacing previous import ‘dbplyr::sql’ by ‘SparkR::sql’ when loading ‘my_pkg’
What I see in Writing R Extensions seems to be the following:
If a package only needs a few objects from another package it can use a fully qualified variable reference [foo::f] in the code instead of a formal import... This is slightly less efficient than a formal import and also loses the advantage of recording all dependencies in the NAMESPACE file (but they still need to be recorded in the DESCRIPTION file). Evaluating foo::f will cause package foo to be loaded, but not attached, if it was not loaded already—this can be an advantage in delaying the loading of a rarely used package.
Am I right that the takeaway of this / best practice is to:
Pick which function is used most often and add that to importFrom
Remove the "less-frequent" function from importFrom but keep that package in DESCRIPTION
Just use :: (perhaps preceded by require()) for the "less-frequent" function
I have always followed this advice:
It’s common for packages to be listed in Imports in DESCRIPTION, but not in NAMESPACE. In fact, this is what I recommend: list the package in DESCRIPTION so that it’s installed, then always refer to it explicitly with pkg::fun().
In your case:
Remove both importFrom
Keep both packages in Imports:
Use dbplyr::sql and SparkR::sql
My main motivation here is consistency: Even without any name clashes I want to always use the full name to make it clear when reading the code where some function comes from. If I do not use importForm and forget about using the full name at one place, R CMD ckeck will catch that. I value this code clarity higher than the (perceived) advantage of collecting dependencies in two places: DESCRIPTION and (more explicitly) NAMESPACE.
I know what a namespace is from other languages but in R I just cannot find a difference between the environment and namespace. Could anyone explain this since in the tutorials I have read (as The Art of R Programming and others) I just cannot find a distinction?
A namespace is something specific to a package. It is defined as a list of directive that allow you to import functions from other packages to be used locally or to export your functions and classes to be used in R.
So if you have created in your package a function called foo you will add to your namespace something like export(foo) to make your function usable.
If you want to import function from a specific package to use them in yours, you will add import(thePackage)
The environment is simply the space where you associate names to values. You can see it as a context in which you can evaluate functions and expressions.
I'm creating an R package that will use a single function from plyr. According to this roxygen2 vignette:
If you are using just a few functions from another package, the
recommended option is to note the package name in the Imports: field
of the DESCRIPTION file and call the function(s) explicitly using ::,
e.g., pkg::fun().
That sounds good. I'm using plyr::ldply() - the full call with :: - so I list plyr in Imports: in my DESCRIPTION file. However, when I use devtools::check() I get this:
* checking dependencies in R code ... NOTE
All declared Imports should be used:
‘plyr’
All declared Imports should be used.
Why do I get this note?
I am able to avoid the note by adding #importFrom dplyr ldply in the file that is using plyr, but then I end but having ldply in my package namespace. Which I do not want, and should not need as I am using plyr::ldply() the single time I use the function.
Any pointers would be appreciated!
(This question might be relevant.)
If ldply() is important for your package's functionality, then you do want it in your package namespace. That is the point of namespace imports. Functions that you need, should be in the package namespace because this is where R will look first for the definition of functions, before then traversing the base namespace and the attached packages. It means that no matter what other packages are loaded or unloaded, attached or unattached, your package will always have access to that function. In such cases, use:
#importFrom plyr ldply
And you can just refer to ldply() without the plyr:: prefix just as if it were another function in your package.
If ldply() is not so important - perhaps it is called only once in a not commonly used function - then, Writing R Extensions 1.5.1 gives the following advice:
If a package only needs a few objects from another package it can use a fully qualified variable reference in the code instead of a formal import. A fully qualified reference to the function f in package foo is of the form foo::f. This is slightly less efficient than a formal import and also loses the advantage of recording all dependencies in the NAMESPACE file (but they still need to be recorded in the DESCRIPTION file). Evaluating foo::f will cause package foo to be loaded, but not attached, if it was not loaded already—this can be an advantage in delaying the loading of a rarely used package.
(I think this advice is actually a little outdated because it is implying more separation between DESCRIPTION and NAMESPACE than currently exists.) It implies you should use #import plyr and refer to the function as plyr::ldply(). But in reality, it's actually suggesting something like putting plyr in the Suggests field of DESCRIPTION, which isn't exactly accommodated by roxygen2 markup nor exactly compliant with R CMD check.
In sum, the official line is that Hadley's advice (which you are quoting) is only preferred for rarely used functions from rarely used packages (and/or packages that take a considerable amount of time to load). Otherwise, just do #importFrom like WRE advises:
Using importFrom selectively rather than import is good practice and recommended notably when importing from packages with more than a dozen exports.
I'm working on an R package at present and trying to follow the best practice guidelines provided by Hadley Wickham at http://r-pkgs.had.co.nz. As part of this, I'm aiming to have all of the package dependencies within the Imports section of the DESCRIPTION file rather than the Depends since I agree with the philosophy of not unnecessarily altering the global environment (something that many CRAN and Bioconductor packages don't seem to follow).
I want to use functions within the Bioconductor package rhdf5 within one of my package functions, in particular h5write(). The issue I've now run into is that it doesn't have its S3 methods declared as such in its NAMESPACE. They are declared using (e.g.)
export(h5write.default)
export(h5writeDataset.matrix)
rather than
S3method(h5write, default)
S3method(h5writeDataset, matrix)
The generic h5write is defined as:
h5write <- function(obj, file, name, ...) {
res <- UseMethod("h5write")
invisible(res)
}
In practice, this means that calls to rhdf5::h5write fail because there is no appropriate h5write method registered.
As far as I can see, there are three solutions to this:
Use Depends rather than Imports in the DESCRIPTION file.
Use library("rhdf5") or require("rhdf5") in the code for the relevant function.
Amend the NAMESPACE file for rhdf5 to use S3methods() rather than export().
All of these have disadvantages. Option 1 means that the package is loaded and attached to the global environment even if the relevant function in my package is never called. Option 2 means use of library in a package, which while again attaches the package to the global environment, and is also deprecated per Hadley Wickham's guidelines. Option 3 would mean relying on the other package author to update their package on Bioconductor and also means that the S3 methods are no longer exported which could in turn break other packages which rely on calling them explicitly.
Have I missed another alternative? I've looked elsewhere on StackOverflow and found the following somewhat relevant questions Importing S3 method from another package and
How to export S3 method so it is available in namespace? but nothing that directly addresses my issue. Of note, the key difference from the first of these two is that the generic and the method are both in the same package, but the issue is the use of export rather than S3method.
Sample code to reproduce the error (without needing to create a package):
loadNamespace("rhdf5")
rdhf5::h5write(1:4, "test.h5", "test")
Error in UseMethod("h5write") :
no applicable method for 'h5write' applied to an object of class
"c('integer', 'numeric')
Alternatively, there is a skeleton package at https://github.com/NikNakk/s3issuedemo which provides a single function demonstrateIssue() which reproduces the error message. It can be installed using devtools::install_github("NikNakk/s3issuedemo").
The key here is to import the specific methods in addition to the generic you want to use. Here is how you can get it to work for the default method.
Note: this assumes that the test.h5 file already exists.
#' #importFrom rhdf5 h5write.default
#' #importFrom rhdf5 h5write
#' #export
myFun <- function(){
h5write(1:4, "test.h5", "test")
}
I also have put up my own small package demonstrating this here.