Is this macro intended to be used in other, similar contexts? Otherwise, why
not have "switch" inside unique2, as in Hadley's original code?
Davor
On 2012-11-22, at 7:25 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>> #define DISPATCH_METHOD(method, x) \
>> switch( TYPEOF(x) ){ \
>> case REALSXP: \
>> return method<REALSXP>(x); \
>> case INTSXP: \
>> return method<INTSXP>(x); \
>> case STRSXP: \
>> return method<STRSXP>(x); \
>> case LGLSXP: \
>> return method<LGLSXP>(x); \
>> default: \
>> Rf_error("Unsupported type"); \
>> return x; \
>> }
>
> Why do we need a macro here? Is it not possible to pass in method as a
> function? It seems like there must be a more elegant way to do
> dynamic dispatch.
>
> Hadley
>
>
> --
> RStudio / Rice University
> http://had.co.nz/
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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
