Thanks for your useful comments, I am trying something like this in a R
file (I have changed the name of my c++ method compared with the example
above, now is called myMethodCpp in order to avoid conflicts with the R
name's function):
myClass$myMethod <- function(param1, param2 = 0L) {
invisib
On 26 October 2016 at 10:05, Hao Ye wrote:
| In sum, the easiest may be to 'hide' the module and deal with this from
the
| R
| side exposing both variants from there and then just calling the one you
| have now.
|
|
| I agree - though I don't think you even need two variants of
>
> In sum, the easiest may be to 'hide' the module and deal with this from
> the R
> side exposing both variants from there and then just calling the one you
> have now.
I agree - though I don't think you even need two variants of the C++
function if there's an R function to handle default argum
On 26 October 2016 at 18:24, Sergio Bra wrote:
| I need to execute something like this in R:
|
| R> res<-new(myClass)
| R>res$myMethod(1000)
|
| So, when you say that I can manage it from the R side, are you talking about
| programming that behaviour in a *.R file? In case of an affirmative answ
Hi Dirk, thanks for your answer.
I have checked your RcppCNPy package, but as you say, there is not methods
implemented, but free functions.
I need to execute something like this in R:
R> res<-new(myClass)
R>res$myMethod(1000)
So, when you say that I can manage it from the R side, are you talki
On 26 October 2016 at 09:48, Sergio Bra wrote:
| I am exposing a c++ class using Rcpp. It works fantastic, but my problem is
how
| to implement a method which has default params. I have the class:
|
| class myClass {
|
| public:
|
| int myMethod(int param1, int param2 = 0);
| }
I am exposing a c++ class using Rcpp. It works fantastic, but my problem is
how to implement a method which has default params. I have the class:
class myClass {
public:
int myMethod(int param1, int param2 = 0);
}
and I config the module:
RCPP_MODULE(mymodule) {
class_("myClass
