On 16 July 2017 at 21:00, Ismail SEZEN wrote: | I really have to fill the page with apologies. Please, forgive me for the trouble. I feel like I've been beaten to death whenever I get an answer from Dirk :) But I’m ok with this. This makes me think twice before sending an email before. You are right. Next question WILL definetely have a minimally reproducible example. I also understood that I need to decrease the number of packages that the package depends on.
Well at least you posted a reference to code! Otherwise we probably would have wasted a number of messages going back and forth... | I really thank you for the extra deep investigation and comments. I was aware of the warnings but ignored them for a while. I need to make a balance between writing pretty code and main research progress. That’s why the code and design are messy for now. I hope to publish it on CRAN when it is mature enough. The 'cannot parse argument' warning was actually a distraction. What really happened was that we now (as discussed) create differently named symbol from Rcpp Attributes. You are one of very few people mixing use of manual .Call and the generated interface, and that bit you. The load/link error is obvious in hindsight, but it took both of us a moment. | This was the source of error I figured out an half hour after I sent the e-mail (Silly me!). You are making a great package to integrate C++ easily into R which is a complex task. This tempts people (who know or don’t know C++) to use C++ in their projects and we moslty solve the issues searching by google but it does not always give the best approach to the problem even if I try to find newest ones. I always try to follow and use latest updates but this kind of old approaches might remain in the code. Me too. "Newer is better", generally, but sometimes small adjustments are needed. | I thank you for your help and apology for the trouble again. No worries. I was a little hyper-sensitive as Rcpp 0.12.12 did fix a number of small bugs left from 0.12.11 related to this, so I was worried. But I think we can file this under 'unusual usage pattern'. All good now. Cheers, Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org _______________________________________________ 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
