On 22 February 2011 at 19:42, Simon Urbanek wrote:
| > Based on the extensive discussion here it appears that
| >
| > 10.5.0 fails as evidenced by your setup and confirmation by other
| >
| > 10.6.0 passes
| >
| > so I want a test that screams if I 10.5 or lower. I don't care about major
| > 8, 9, ...
| >
| > | Why don't you just use my code ? ;) You can just copy my condition in
verbatim just after Rcpp:::capabilities()[["Rcpp modules"]] && - it was
designed that way ...
| >
| > I tested your code on static strings here and I fail to see how it
| > differentiates between 10.5.0 ("bad") and 10.6.0 ("good").
| >
| > What am I missing here?
| >
|
| The e-mailI sent about version numbers ;). OS X 10.5.n results in
Sys.info()['release'] == 9.n and OS X 10.6.n in Sys.info()['release'] == 10.n
because Sys.info() reports the Darwin version, not OS X version. Ken had 10.6.6
so incidentally that corresponds to Darwin (6+4).6 = 10.6 so the 6 there has
nothing to do with the first 6 in 10.6.6 ;). Ah, don't we all love riddles? ;)
Ouch, that is sick.
New version based in part on Baptiste's tests too:
@@ -22,8 +22,14 @@
gc()
}
-if( Rcpp:::capabilities()[["Rcpp modules"]] ) {
+## The unit test in this file fails on OS X 10.5.* but pass on 10.6.*
+## Sys.info release comes back with 10.* for the latter but 9.* for the former
+## Thanks to Simon Urbanek and Baptiste Auguie for suggesting and testing this
+.badOSX <- (Sys.info()['sysname'] == "Darwin" &&
+ isTRUE(as.integer(gsub("\\..*","",Sys.info()['release'])) < 10L) )
+if( Rcpp:::capabilities()[["Rcpp modules"]] && ! .badOSX ) {
+
test.Module.package <- function( ){
td <- tempfile()
With a bit of luck I don't have too many typos and condition inversions in
here.
Dirk
--
Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com
_______________________________________________
Rcpp-devel mailing list
Rcpp-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org
https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
