Henrik,
A completely different alternative, is to have a way to disable
parallel processing in your examples / tests / vignettes, e.g. if (np
== 1) registerDoSEQ() else registerDoParallel(np). Personally, I'm
not a big fan of that approach because it's an ad-hoc workaround and
you're end up not
Your package uses parallel processing (foreach w/ doParallel).
Peeking at the code, it looks like the vignette is using single-core
processing via doParallel::registerDoParallel(np) where np = 1. On
Unix-like system, this *forks* off a single R process, and on Windows
it *launches* a single backgr
On 24/04/17 12:39, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 23/04/2017 7:53 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 24/04/17 11:36, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 23/04/2017 6:18 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/04/17 23:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Looks like
extern void F77_NAME(mnnd)(double *, double *, int *, double *,
double *
On 23/04/2017 7:53 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 24/04/17 11:36, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 23/04/2017 6:18 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/04/17 23:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Looks like
extern void F77_NAME(mnnd)(double *, double *, int *, double *,
double *);
to me.
One more (I hope it's the las
On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 24 April 2017 at 11:47, Rolf Turner wrote:
>
> And per Duncan's last (and his earlier emails) maybe you need to call from R
> into C (for finer control over the interface) and only then call your Fortran
> worker function. To hide i
On 24/04/17 11:36, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 23/04/2017 6:18 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/04/17 23:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Looks like
extern void F77_NAME(mnnd)(double *, double *, int *, double *,
double *);
to me.
One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
One of my subroutines has an
On 24 April 2017 at 11:47, Rolf Turner wrote:
|
| On 24/04/17 11:22, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| > I would be surpised if init.c was Fortran. Anyway...
|
| It isn't of course. But it is the device used for "registering
| routines" of all both flavours (i.e. both C and Fortran).
And per Dunc
On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Duncan Murdoch
wrote:
> On 23/04/2017 6:18 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
[SNIP]
> This is important: *there is no way to pass a Fortran "LOGICAL" from R to
> Fortran*.
>
> The issue is that different Fortran compilers store LOGICAL in different
> ways. Some are equivale
On 24/04/17 11:22, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
I would be surpised if init.c was Fortran. Anyway...
It isn't of course. But it is the device used for "registering
routines" of all both flavours (i.e. both C and Fortran).
cheers,
Rolf
--
Technical Editor ANZJS
Department of Statistics
Univ
On 23/04/2017 6:18 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/04/17 23:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Looks like
extern void F77_NAME(mnnd)(double *, double *, int *, double *,
double *);
to me.
One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
One of my subroutines has an argument of type *logical*. There is no
On 24 April 2017 at 10:45, Rolf Turner wrote:
| On 24/04/17 10:31, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 24 April 2017 at 10:18, Rolf Turner wrote:
| > | One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
| > |
| > | One of my subroutines has an argument of type *logical*. There is no
| > | logical type in C.
On 24/04/17 10:31, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 24 April 2017 at 10:18, Rolf Turner wrote:
| One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
|
| One of my subroutines has an argument of type *logical*. There is no
| logical type in C. So, since I am perforce using C-speak, I cannot
| change "void
On 24 April 2017 at 10:18, Rolf Turner wrote:
| One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
|
| One of my subroutines has an argument of type *logical*. There is no
| logical type in C. So, since I am perforce using C-speak, I cannot
| change "void *" to "void logical".
|
| I have a (very vag
On 23/04/17 23:05, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Looks like
extern void F77_NAME(mnnd)(double *, double *, int *, double *,
double *);
to me.
One more (I hope it's the last!) question:
One of my subroutines has an argument of type *logical*. There is no
logical type in C. So, since I am perforc
On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 10:17:01AM +0200, Alexandre Courtiol wrote:
Could it be that one your computer you can build vignettes quickly thanks
to some caching of the knitr chunk output but that it takes too much time
building that without the cache...? ... CRAN does not like when
anything takes mo
On 23/04/2017 6:38 AM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 23/04/17 21:57, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 22/04/2017 5:25 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
(1) I found that having an R function with the same name as that of a
routine (Fortran subroutine in this case) that it called, causes all
sorts of chaos. I had a fu
On 23/04/17 21:57, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 22/04/2017 5:25 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
(1) I found that having an R function with the same name as that of a
routine (Fortran subroutine in this case) that it called, causes all
sorts of chaos. I had a function "binsrt" that called a Fortran
subro
On 22/04/2017 5:25 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
I have, like many others it would appear, been struggling with
the new-ish convention of requiring --- or quasi-requiring --- that
"routines" be "registered" and the warning generated by R CMD check to
the effect:
Found no calls to: 'R_registerRoutines
18 matches
Mail list logo
