On 21/03/2021 7:18 a.m., Gianmarco Alberti wrote:
Hello,
I am in the process of testing a new version of my GmAMisc package before
submitting it to CRAN.
I have checked it using:
(a) devtools::check_win_devel()
https://win-builder.r-project.org/T9yi5bawc203
(b) devtools::check_win_release()
https://win-builder.r-project.org/VACDopQ9QBMi
(c) devtools::check_win_oldrelease()
https://win-builder.r-project.org/yoIK3iE7IZqk
Now,
(a) returns 2 notes about functions’ examples whose execution time is larger
than 10 sec
This didn’t happen when testing earlier versions of the same package. I did not
make any major change to those functions, excluding updating some chunks of
code to adapt them to the new structure of the ‘spatstat' package. Most of my
functions whose execution time is larger than 10 sec are feature Monte
Carlo-based resampling; I have tried to reduce the number of randomised
iterations (e.g., from 199 to 99) but no significant changes were produced when
it comes to the execution time.
Did the examples actually become slower? You can time them locally:
you won't get the same timings as Win-builder, but relative timings
should be roughly proportional.
If they did become slower, then you really should modify the examples.
This might mean using an unrealistically small number of iterations;
that's better than not running them at all, because at least it will
show users how your functions work.
Or maybe Win-builder was under heavy load, and that's why the timings
are slower. You could take a chance and submit with a note about this.
(b) returns the same two notes as (a)
(c) returns 1 error:
Package required and available but unsuitable version: ‘spatstat.linnet'
How are you stating your dependency on this package? Your current
version only mentions "spatstat (>= 1.56-0)". CRAN has spatstat.linnet
2.0-0, but perhaps Win-builder hadn't updated its old release library to
that version when you ran your test.
Duncan Murdoch
I am wondering:
(1) are the 2 notes returned by (a) and (b) a relevant obstacle when it comes
to getting my new version on CRAN? I am a little concerned because I do not
know how to reduce the execution time further.
(2) why the difference between (a)-(b) and (c) when it comes to the error
related to spatstat.linnet? Is the error returned by (c) fatal in anticipation
of submitting the package to CRAN? If it is, how can I tackle that?
Thank you in advance for any help on the above issues.
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
