On 30 November 2012 at 15:52, Darren Cook wrote:
| > Rcpp is a worthwhile effort and your work is admirable, but
| > it is not perfect. ... (if you care about that, of course).
|
| I think Dirk's point was that this is an interesting topic, but this
| list is the wrong place for discussing it.
Yes.
| (Dirk, I couldn't track down the r-devel discussion you mentioned in its
| archives; do you have a URL or more exact date for it?)
Here is Simon Urnbanked on May 26, but I don't right now find this on gmane
either. It is in response to a new thread which itself followed on something
where Brian gave equally clear recommendation for .Call against .C:
That is bogus - .C is inherently unsafe wrt vector lengths so talking
about safety here is IMHO nonsensical. Your "safety" relies on bombing
the program - that is arguably much less safe than using checks that
Brian was talking about because they are recoverable. You can argue
either way, but there is no winner - the real answer is use .Call()
instead.
"The real answer is use .Call instead" works for me.
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
