Hi, Sorry for the delay in getting back to this; I took the opportunity to rewrite a substantial part of the package, and this slowed down the update for those c++11 / clang issues. The bottom line is that using Rcpp::function in modules was enough to please OSX 10.9 on CRAN: http://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-devel-macosx-x86_64/cda-00check.html
Thanks, baptiste On 31 October 2013 13:15, Romain Francois <rom...@r-enthusiasts.com> wrote: > Le 31/10/2013 15:59, baptiste auguie a écrit : > >> Dear Rcpp gurus, >> >> >> Today a CRAN maintainer informed us of the failure of a few Rcpp-related >> packages to build under the new version of the Mac operating system, OS >> X 10.9 aka Mavericks. >> I do have access to a Mac, but I'm reluctant (in fact, unable) to update >> to Mavericks, therefore I'm in the dark when it comes to fixing /testing >> for the errors reported in the log file. On a positive note, it appears >> at first sight that most of the errors are relatively benign, and >> similar-looking issues are reported for all the packages involved. That >> gives me hope that once the underlying issue is well identified, most >> packages can be fixed with minimal changes. >> >> Here's the info we were given from CRAN, >> >> "OS X 10.9 (aka Mavericks) has a new C++ compiler, clang++ with libcxx >> headers/runtime. Your package fails to compile with that compiler: see >> the appropriate log at http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/__bdr/Mavericks/ >> >> <http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/bdr/Mavericks/> ." >> >> My two packages are cda and planar. The error seems to occur in the >> Modules definition, e.g. from this line in my code >> >> https://github.com/baptiste/planar/blob/master/src/multilayer.cpp#L231 >> >> where "function" is judged ambiguous, as far as I understand. This >> "function" is presumably something from >> Rcpp/include/Rcpp/module/Module_generated_function.h but I am not >> familiar with that code. >> >> Any ideas, hints? >> >> Best regards, >> >> baptiste >> > > I sent you a pull request on github. > > .function abuses the compiler recognition, it is just unfortunate that > something else is called function, which is what confused it. > > Not sure there could be defenses against it. > > In the meantime, you should be fine by just using Rcpp::function > > Also, for such trivial uses of modules (i.e. no classes), maybe it is > worth considering using // [[Rcpp::export]] and code generation given by > compileAttributes instead of modules. > > > Romain > > -- > Romain Francois > Professional R Enthusiast > +33(0) 6 28 91 30 30 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
