Le 8 avr. 2014 à 11:47, Rainer M Krug a écrit :
> Romain François writes:
>
>> Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:51, Rainer M Krug a écrit :
>>
>>> Martyn Plummer writes:
>>>
And another 2 cents from me.
A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
functionality you a
Romain François writes:
> Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:51, Rainer M Krug a écrit :
>
>> Martyn Plummer writes:
>>
>>> And another 2 cents from me.
>>>
>>> A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
>>> functionality you are providing, I think a package is the best way to
>>> deliver i
Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:51, Rainer M Krug a écrit :
> Martyn Plummer writes:
>
>> And another 2 cents from me.
>>
>> A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
>> functionality you are providing, I think a package is the best way to
>> deliver it. There is a well developed framewo
Martyn Plummer writes:
> And another 2 cents from me.
>
> A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
> functionality you are providing, I think a package is the best way to
> deliver it. There is a well developed framework for versioning,
> dependency resolution, testing, and dis
Hello Martyn,
Thanks for joining the discussion;
Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:36, Martyn Plummer a écrit :
> And another 2 cents from me.
>
> A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
> functionality you are providing, I think a package is the best way to
> deliver it. There is a we
And another 2 cents from me.
A package is the basic unit of functionality in R. Whatever
functionality you are providing, I think a package is the best way to
deliver it. There is a well developed framework for versioning,
dependency resolution, testing, and distribution.
If you choose some other
Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:12, Xavier Robin a écrit :
> My 2 cents...
>
> On 07/04/14 10:12, Romain François wrote:
>> It would also mean many copies of the same code base. To which I’m thinking:
>> so what.
> No, it will mean many copies of /many different and mostly outdated/ code
> bases.
Still:
My 2 cents...
On 07/04/14 10:12, Romain François wrote:
It would also mean many copies of the same code base. To which I’m thinking: so
what.
No, it will mean many copies of /many different and mostly outdated/
code bases.
You can count on me to forget to git pull next time I update my packag
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Romain François wrote:
[...]
> > Some R functions, e.g. useRcpp11(), could be written that, when run in
> > the package directory, clones a repository in inst/include/Rcpp, and
> > also updates pertinent licensing information (this package uses
> > Rcpp11, which is
Thanks to have interest in this discussion.
Le 7 avr. 2014 à 20:30, Kevin Ushey a écrit :
> Here's some thoughts, from the perspective of a package developer who
> might want to use Rcpp11.
>
> One option is to have the Rcpp11 distribution live as a git repository
> within the `inst/include` d
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Romain François wrote:
[...]
> Oh, I see, you mean installing Rcpp* dependent packages from git(hub)
> directly. I imagine some people would want to put the headers into their
> tree, as ordinary files.
>
>
> Having the files into the client package is what I meant.
Here's some thoughts, from the perspective of a package developer who
might want to use Rcpp11.
One option is to have the Rcpp11 distribution live as a git repository
within the `inst/include` directory of a developer's package. A
package developer could clone the repository (or have it track the
Le 7 avr. 2014 à 19:20, Gábor Csárdi a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Romain François
> wrote:
> [...]
>> The only small downsides I see here is that (1) users potentially have to do
>> more work to include Rcpp* in their packages (although you can just write an
>> R function to in
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Romain François wrote:
[...]
> The only small downsides I see here is that (1) users potentially have to
> do more work to include Rcpp* in their packages (although you can just
> write an R function to include/update their Rcpp* versions); and that (2)
> source pac
Le 7 avr. 2014 à 15:13, Gábor Csárdi a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Romain François
> wrote:
> [...]
> However, in terms of wins:
> - package developers would know for sure which version of the codebase is
> used with their package. Once they have done testing, they don’t have to
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Romain François wrote:
[...]
> However, in terms of wins:
> - package developers would know for sure which version of the codebase is
> used with their package. Once they have done testing, they don't have to be
> hostage of api breakage and things like << please re
Hello,
Just wanted to start a conversation about distribution of Rcpp. For a long
time, distributing Rcpp has meant distributing a package (Rcpp) that contains
the Rcpp library.
These days, we are able to make the codebase completely header only. For
example, the Rcpp11 package that I’m abou
17 matches
Mail list logo
