Le 13/04/10 15:46, satu a écrit :
Dear all,
After having a look at the "inline" package and also going through the
"Rcpp" package which is tighty related to it, it came to me this question:
no.
1) my C/ C++ code has a return type (let say a double[][] or a user define
class)
2) I am working with an extensive library built by someone else and I don't
have the time/knowledge to change it by means of working with "pointer"
variables in order to avoid the return sentence,,,
Please at least find the time to read "Writing R Extensions"
question A: can I use the -inline- "cfunction" without resorting to the Rcpp
functionality?
yes.
inline knowns about Rcpp but can work on its own. you need Rcpp if you
use the Rcpp argument of cfunction.
-- if this is true, question A2: do I need to go deep in the source code
coming from the library (that I am trying to use) to perform the interface
through the Rcpp classes?
no.
questionB: is it true that the working with the -inline- function you have
to have only void return type code?
Which interface are we talking about ? .C, .Call ?
All the documentation is available in writing R extensions.
In .Call, which is the preferred way when you use Rcpp, the return type
must be SEXP or whatever that can be implicitely converted to SEXP. Many
classes in Rcpp do have implicit conversion to SEXP
(Rcpp::IntegerVector, Rcpp::List, etc ...)
-- if this is false, questionB2: do you have a simple example of this?
?cfunction
Writing R extensions
Many thanks
Sergio Barrios
--
Romain Francois
Professional R Enthusiast
+33(0) 6 28 91 30 30
http://romainfrancois.blog.free.fr
|- http://bit.ly/9aKDM9 : embed images in Rd documents
|- http://tr.im/OIXN : raster images and RImageJ
|- http://tr.im/OcQe : Rcpp 0.7.7
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
