<div dir="ltr">Brian,<div><br></div><div style>I have just a couple quick questions regarding chart.Weights and chart.RiskReward as generic functions and cleaning up the documentation as you did with the versioned functions.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>My plan is to use an alias for the chart.Weights.* functions for the different classes and then have a generic chart.Weights function with a call to UseMethod("chart.Weights"). The first argument is RP for chart.Weights.RP, DE for <a href="http://chart.Weights.DE">chart.Weights.DE</a>, and so on. Should the arguments of the chart.Weights.* functions be the same?</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Should we have the @param and other tags only for one function? Would that go on the generic chart.Weights function?</div><div style><br></div><div style>My approach would be the same for the chart.Scatter.* functions.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Thanks,</div><div style>Ross</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Brian G. Peterson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brian@braverock.com" target="_blank">brian@braverock.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Sounds good. - Brian<div class="im"><br>
<br>
On 08/18/2013 03:06 PM, Ross Bennett wrote:<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
Brian,<br>
<br>
Thanks for clarifying, I was worried that might be the case. I could add<br>
a new function named chart.RiskReward and make that our generic function<br>
and use an alias for the existing chart.Scatter.* functions. It could<br>
look something like this:<br>
<br>
chart.RiskReward.optimize.<u></u>portfolio.ROI <- chart.Scatter.ROI<br>
chart.RiskReward.optimize.<u></u>portfolio.random <- chart.Scatter.RP<br>
<br>
Would that be ok and worthwhile to do?<br>
<br>
Ross<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Brian G. Peterson <<a href="mailto:brian@braverock.com" target="_blank">brian@braverock.com</a><br></div><div class="im">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:brian@braverock.com" target="_blank">brian@braverock.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
On 08/18/2013 01:35 PM, Ross Bennett wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
The PerformanceAnalytics packages already has a chart.Scatter<br>
function.<br>
Will we have any naming or masking issues if I make chart.Scatter a<br>
function for the different optimize.portfolio.objects?<br>
<br>
<br>
It's easy to make chart.Weights a generic, but it will be much<br>
harder with chart.Scatter.*<br>
<br></div>
Because PerformanceAnalytics is on CRAN and much more widely used,<div class="im"><br>
we'd need to match the argument list, and create a<br>
chart.Scatter.default in PerfA. I don't see any way to match the<br>
argument list though.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Brian<br>
</div></blockquote><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
GSoC-PortA mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GSoC-PortA@lists.r-forge.r-project.org" target="_blank">GSoC-PortA@lists.r-forge.r-<u></u>project.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gsoc-porta" target="_blank">http://lists.r-forge.r-<u></u>project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/gsoc-porta</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>