Message-ID: <30fbd143-9301-28c8-90bc-d7328691ec7c@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
Date: 2018-04-24T16:48:08Z
From: Uwe Ligges
Subject: [R-pkg-devel] some notes
In-Reply-To: <7c2d08a4-8fcd-b644-ccf6-79b60b48be37@effectivedefense.org>
On 24.04.2018 18:45, Spencer Graves wrote:
>
>
> On 2018-04-24 09:50, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>> On 24/04/2018 10:29 AM, Xubo Yue wrote:
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> I just got feedback from CRAN auto-checking and here are some notes I
>>> cannot resolve:
>>>
>>> * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... NOTE
>>> Maintainer: 'Jian Kang <jiankang at umich.edu>'
>>>
>>> New submission
>>>
>>> Possibly mis-spelled words in DESCRIPTION:
>>> ?? Kang (7:196)
>>>
>>> I am not sure how to solve this.
>>>
>>
>> You can ignore those.
>>
>>> Also, here are some running time notes:
>>>
>>> ** running examples for arch 'i386' ... [250s] NOTE
>>> Examples with CPU or elapsed time > 10s
>>> ?????????????????????????? user system elapsed
>>> multipleRegion_plot???? 190.35?? 1.92? 205.61
>>> summary_kcca????????????? 1.40?? 0.17?? 14.79
>>> permkCCA_multipleRegion?? 1.19?? 0.11?? 14.51
>>> nii2RData???????????????? 0.40?? 0.20?? 13.84
>>> ** running examples for arch 'x64' ... [79s] NOTE
>>> Examples with CPU or elapsed time > 10s
>>> ????????????????????????? user system elapsed
>>> multipleRegion_plot???? 18.36?? 2.06?? 33.66
>>> permkCCA_multipleRegion? 1.47?? 0.20?? 14.88
>>> summary_kcca???????????? 1.48?? 0.16?? 14.85
>>> nii2RData??????????????? 0.62?? 0.23?? 14.09
>>> * checking PDF version of manual ... OK
>>> * DONE
>>> Status: 3 NOTEs
>>>
>>> My total running time is less than 10 minutes. I am wondering is it
>>> ok to
>>> ignore these two NOTEs?
>>
>> You shouldn't ignore those.? Your package will be tested many, many
>> times, and it will take more than 3 minutes for just one example.? (It
>> will be tested whenever any package you depend on is changed, to make
>> sure the change doesn't break yours.)
>>
>> Use a smaller dataset, do less, or whatever you can to get the
>> multipleRegion_plot example down to a time similar to the other ones,
>> i.e. well below 10s in user+system time.
>
>
> ????? If it becomes infeasible to find smaller datasets, etc., you can
> cut out certain tests with a construct like the following:
>
>
> if(!fda::CRAN()){
> # ... tests to run on other computers but to skip on CRAN.? ...
> }
Ummm, how should fda::CRAN() now that it runs on CRAN?
CRAN prefers to ship a set of examples/tests etc. that meet our
requirements. If you want to ru addtional tests and/or examples, then
run them conditionally on something that is true for your local machine,
e.g. some defined environment variable.
Best,
Uwe Ligges
>
>
> ????? Obviously, you'll need fda::CRAN.? I found it infeasible to meet
> that requirement and so disabled the tests that violated CRAN's rule on
> this.
>
>
> ????? I've been told that this is a suboptimal solution and should be
> avoided.? I agree.
>
>
> ????? Hope this helps.
> ????? Spencer Graves
>
>>
>> You don't have a lot of control of elapsed time because it will depend
>> on what else is happening on the test machine, but if the other times
>> are short, usually elapsed time will also be short.
>>
>> Duncan Murdoch
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-package-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel