Ah interesting. PutRNGstate does indeed allocate so might trigger GC. https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/fbf5cdf29d923395b537a9893f46af1aa75e38f3/src/main/RNG.c#L437
That's a whole new Pandora's box right there. Le 21 août 2014 à 12:10, Matteo Fasiolo <matteo.fasi...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Hi Romain and Gregor, > > maybe I am misunderstanding everything, but hasn't this problem been > explained and solved here: > > http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/rcpp-devel/2013-May/005838.html > > Best, > > Matteo > > > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Romain Francois <rom...@r-enthusiasts.com> > wrote: > > Le 21 août 2014 à 11:47, Gregor Kastner <gregor.kast...@wu.ac.at> a écrit : > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:34:23 +0200 > > Romain Francois <rom...@r-enthusiasts.com> wrote: > > > > GK> Yep, sorry for the misuse of language. And I do understand going back to > > GK> GetRNGstate() and PutRNGstate() is a bit old school; but I can > > definitely > > GK> confirm that it seems to be safer than resorting do the > > GK> constructor/destuctor magic. > >> > >> Compiler/Destructor is not magic. It is determinism. > >> > >> That's like feature #1 of C++. > > > > agreed: s/magic/automagic/g > > > >> And BTW it is definitely safer than any manual handling. > > > > I cannot say that in the current case, as relying on the destructor does > > seem > > to create problems (in rare cases, making it even worse!) if objects which > > are to be returned are instantiated after the RNGScope object. Conditional > > on > > the fact the I understood JJ correctly, that is. > > Then it's a bug in how constructor or destructor is implemented in this > class, probably with the counter. > > Or something invalidates the very assumptions of C++ here. Perhaps raw R api > is called and the destructor is not called because of some long jump or > something. > > Without a repex anyway, it is hard to diagnose what's happening. > > You're probably onto somthing, but going directly to the "destructor are not > safe, I'll just use C function calls" is a dangerous route, soon you'll start > using SEXP as you won't trust ctors/dtors of Rcpp objects do the right thing. > > > Manual handling works perfectly. > > > > Best, > > /g > > _______________________________________________ > 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
