Skip to content

[Rcpp-devel] Rcpp 0.8.4

6 messages · Dirk Eddelbuettel, Romain Francois, Dominick Samperi

#
Release 0.8.4 is now on CRAN (with a little delay due to vacations, and we
even got lucky in getting it out now rather than at the end).  The relevant
NEWS entry is below.  

0.8.4   2010-07-09

    o   new sugar vector functions: rep, rep_len, rep_each, rev, head, tail,
	diag
	
    o	sugar has been extended to matrices: The Matrix class now extends the 
    	Matrix_Base template that implements CRTP. Currently sugar functions 
    	for matrices are: outer, col, row, lower_tri, upper_tri, diag

    o   The unit tests have been reorganised into fewer files with one call
 	each to cxxfunction() (covering multiple tests) resulting in a
 	significant speedup

    o	The Date class now uses the same mktime() replacement that R uses
        (based on original code from the timezone library by Arthur Olson)
	permitting wide date ranges on all operating systems

    o   The FastLM/example has been updated, a new benchmark based on the
        historical Longley data set has been added

    o   RcppStringVector now uses std::vector<std::string> internally
    
    o	setting the .Data slot of S4 objects did not work properly
#
Currently Rcpp 0.8.4 builds cleanly at CRAN under Windows only, and
correspondingly, the dependent package cxxPack now fails under
Windows only (not able to find header files?).
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote:

            
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/rcpp-devel/attachments/20100715/fda82a22/attachment-0001.htm>
#
Le 16/07/10 01:18, Dominick Samperi a ?crit :
This is as close to nonsense as it can be, please stop this quest of 
yours to advertise problems that do not exist and RTFM

we do get a trivial warning on linux which has already been fixed, and 
0.8.4 has not been cran processed under OSX but we have evidence that it 
works. solaris is a different matter.
The author of that package chose to not follow the documented way to 
pull in the headers , which is as I told you before to add

LinkingTo: Rcpp

in the DESCRIPTION file

Also, see this thread on R-devel on how to invoke Rscript from Makevars 
correctly, which incidently is also documented in the "Rcpp-extending" 
vignette.

Romain

  
    
#
Le 16/07/10 10:12, Romain Francois a ?crit :
and here is the link of the thread:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.r.devel/24449

  
    
#
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Romain Francois
<romain at r-enthusiasts.com>wrote:

            
I am only reporting what CRAN shows (does it publish nonsense?). My only
"quest" is to
prevent crashes of my work every time Rcpp does a release. I decided to use
Rcpp because
I thought we could cooperate on testing.
The "documented way" is a moving target, and the only defense is to test
before doing a release.
(both unit testing and integration testing).

Since you "forgot" to add the GNU make system dependency I guess you could
use a little
review of the "documented way" as well.

Dominick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/rcpp-devel/attachments/20100716/3bcfc560/attachment.htm>
#
Le 16/07/10 15:26, Dominick Samperi a ?crit :
Then we don't see the same thing. Here is the cran test results page for 
Rcpp: http://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Rcpp.html

The three warnings on top are R-devel only, they are due to a more rigid 
test of links used in Rd pages. The development version of Rcpp has been 
fixed to take that into account.

The errors you see on solaris are due to new code. We have limited 
bandwidth to test on solaris/suncc and no actual machine to do it, 
therefore we sometimes have to resort to use cran checks as a way to 
find errors. In that instance, the developer responsible for this code 
has been alerted of the issue, and I'm sure he will find a workaround. 
If someone has access to a solaris/suncc combo, then I'd like to hear 
about it so that we can send them release candidates each time we want 
to release Rcpp.

The errors on OSX are related to version 0.8.3, because 0.8.4 has not 
yet been processed, it always take more time. However, we have 
information that Rcpp 0.8.4 works on OSX. The error in 0.8.3 was due to 
a name clash between Rcpp and a macro that is defined only in the ppc 
architecture, which my machine does not have.

Anyway "Currently Rcpp 0.8.4 builds cleanly at CRAN under Windows only" 
is just wrong.
The recommendation to use LinkingTo: Rcpp came out with Rcpp 0.8.0, 
three months ago. You released your package 5 times in the meantime, and 
you seem to choose to not follow advice. In the future, I might not 
waste my time and just not advise you of anything.
Well, the email points out the "Rcpp-package" vignette, which contains 
the full story. I can write the document, but I cannot force you to read 
it, this has to come from you.