Dominick, On 30/04/10 18:40, Dominick Samperi wrote: > Just to be sure that I understand, are you suggesting that the R-safe way to > do > things is to not use STL, and to not use C++ memory management and > exception handling? How can you leave a function in an irregular way without > triggering a seg fault or something like that, in which case there is no > chance > for recovery anyway?
If you had time to try out your work with CXXR, I would be very interested to hear your experiences. Picking up on some of the points already raised in this thread: 1. CXXR's main program is written in C++, so it should deal with C++ initialisation and teardown correctly. (However, it has been so far tested only with gcc and the Intel C++ compiler, so there are doubtless plenty of submerged rocks still to discover.) 2. Within CXXR, all indirect flows of control are handled using C++ exceptions, and it is certainly the intention that user-supplied code should also be free to use C++ exceptions (subject to the caution that is always necessary in using C++ exceptions). 3. As regards memory allocation, in addition to the mechanisms available in standard R, you can of course use standard C++ 'new' and 'delete'. Also, objects of any C++ class that inherits directly or indirectly from CXXR::GCNode will be looked after by CXXR's own internal garbage collection. 4. Regarding protection from garbage collection, the mechanisms of standard R are available. But for C++ code, the preferred approach is to use the CXXR::GCRoot<T> and CXXR::GCStackRoot<T> smart pointers. Basically an object of one of these types behaves like a plain T* pointer (where T inherits from CXXR::GCNode), but whatever it points to is protected from garbage collection - for as long as the pointer exists and points to that object. Let me know (offline from this list) if I can be of any help. Andrew Runnalls ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
