Dominick, wtf?
Rcpp is on one of the most rapid development cycles that I've ever
seen. If you want stability, then why don't you wait about six more
months before you start using Rcpp in your projects.
Alternatively, you can easily center your package on a particular
version by enclosing your p
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> And worst of
> all, Uwe is getting tired of the odd and still unexplained build issues on
> 'doze and has pushed us to the back of the bus.
This explains why the Windows builds are being delayed (Uwe is responsible
for Windows builds),
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
> no. see this in about every single file:
>
> // Rcpp is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> // WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> // MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
>
Le 06/07/10 20:54, Dominick Samperi a écrit :
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Romain Francois
mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
(http://win-builder.r-project.org/), and
yes, using
this service as part of integration testing before releasing to CRAN
will red
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
> (http://win-builder.r-project.org/), and
>> yes, using
>> this service as part of integration testing before releasing to CRAN
>> will reduce
>> the number of problems for client packages that use Rcpp. 1000 unit
>> tests will
>> not help.
>
Le 06/07/10 18:11, Douglas Bates a écrit :
The lme4a package currently depends on Rcpp_0.8.3 and uses some
"sugar" constructions - but only in a few places and I could replace
those with explicit loops or calls to std::transform fairly easily.
I see that Rcpp_0.8.3 is available on CRAN as the
Le 06/07/10 19:23, Dominick Samperi a écrit :
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
"Sugar" started really only good post-0.8.2. And with the Rmetrics
meeting
coming up, and a larger than usual set of changes, we released 0.8.3
right
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> "Sugar" started really only good post-0.8.2. And with the Rmetrics meeting
> coming up, and a larger than usual set of changes, we released 0.8.3 right
> before that meeting. At the time Rcpp passed on all systems we could test
> on.
> W
On 6 July 2010 at 12:03, Douglas Bates wrote:
| On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > On 6 July 2010 at 11:11, Douglas Bates wrote:
| > | The lme4a package currently depends on Rcpp_0.8.3 and uses some
| > | "sugar" constructions - but only in a few places and I could
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 6 July 2010 at 11:11, Douglas Bates wrote:
> | The lme4a package currently depends on Rcpp_0.8.3 and uses some
> | "sugar" constructions - but only in a few places and I could replace
> | those with explicit loops or calls to std::tr
On 6 July 2010 at 11:11, Douglas Bates wrote:
| The lme4a package currently depends on Rcpp_0.8.3 and uses some
| "sugar" constructions - but only in a few places and I could replace
| those with explicit loops or calls to std::transform fairly easily.
|
| I see that Rcpp_0.8.3 is available on CR
The lme4a package currently depends on Rcpp_0.8.3 and uses some
"sugar" constructions - but only in a few places and I could replace
those with explicit loops or calls to std::transform fairly easily.
I see that Rcpp_0.8.3 is available on CRAN as the source code package
but the Windows and OS X bi
Le 06/07/10 13:14, Romain Francois a écrit :
I do plan to have a sugar version of "rev". Actually I think I'll write
it right after I press "send".
Done in rev 1790.
--
Romain Francois
Professional R Enthusiast
+33(0) 6 28 91 30 30
http://romainfrancois.blog.free.fr
|- http://bit.ly/98Uf7u :
Hi,
(just saw I did not pick this one up)
It might be one of those cases where we lack a const version of some
operator. or maybe the compiler is confused about R_len_t
operator[] are defined as:
inline Proxy operator[]( const int& i ){ return cache.ref(i) ; }
inline Proxy operator[]( const
14 matches
Mail list logo
