2018-03-20 4:33 GMT+01:00 Tim Keitt <tke...@utexas.edu>:
> Why not something like:
>
> Rcpp::sourceCpp(code='
> #include <Rcpp.h>
> using Rcpp::Rcout;
>
> // [[Rcpp::export]]
> void print_addr(SEXP x){
> Rcout << static_cast<void*>(x) << std::endl;
> }')
>
> I'm not sure why one would expect Rcpp types to automatically yield a
> pointer appropriate for printing.
I may have my own reasons for that, but that's not the point here. The
point is that I expected a homogeneous behaviour across Rcpp classes
when any object is passed to operator<< (i.e., print *something*).
By grepping the source, I discovered that Matrix and Vector have an
implementation of operator<<, but not the other classes.
Of course, this is a minor issue, because anyone is able to define
this operator if needed. I simply wanted to note it here, just in case
Dirk considered that all classes should have a well-defined one.
Iñaki
>
> THK
>
>
_______________________________________________
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
