On 4/6/07, Byron Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's come up for me when I do FFI stuff. For GUI stuff I usually just > want to suppress, but it's possible that you'd want to detect > visibility if you were to make the GUI more programmable. I usually > end up having to work around the whole business by fiddling with > R_Visible.
My GUI is basically a wrapper around R (it's an exercise in teaching myself Qt), so replicating console functionality is a major goal. R is embedded and not the main thread, mostly because I didn't read R-exts carefully enough before starting. But most things have gone fairly smoothly, and I want to see how far I can go. > Speaking of R_tryEval, can someone with the appropriate powers PRETTY > PLEASE just make it an official API? Having it continue to be > unofficial is just getting silly. > > > On 4/6/07, Luke Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Even though it isn't officially part of the API it has seen some use > > so I'd prefer not to change the interface; instead add > > > > SEXP R_tryEvalWithVis(SEXP e, SEXP env, int *ErrorOccurred, int *visible); > > > > or something along those lines and define R_tryEval internally in > > terms of that. > > > > It may be worth thinking a bit more though to see if there is > > something else that might be useful at this point. I vaguely recall > > thinking recently about needing something else of this flavor but I > > can't seem to remember what it was exactly -- will try to see if I can > > recall. OK, I'll stick with withVisible for now, and wait for something like R_tryEvalWithVis. -Deepayan ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
