search for: r_devel

I am not able to #include "R_ext/Altrep.h" from a C++ file. I think it needs two changes: 1. add the same __cplusplus check as most of the other header files: #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" { #endif ... #ifdef __cplusplus } #endif 2. change the line R_new_altrep(R_altrep_class_t class, SEXP data1, SEXP data2); to

Thanks for the report. Fixed in R_devel with r72631; I'll port to R-patched later today or tomorrow. The default setting and how to get the current settings are documented in the Details section of the enableJIT help page at the end of the paragraph for enableJIT. Best, luke On Wed, 26 Apr 2017, Herv? Pag?s wrote: > Hi, >...

If I have loaded the C code: SEXP altrep_STRING_IS_SORTED(SEXP x) { return ScalarInteger(STRING_IS_SORTED(x)); } and defined the function: issort <- function(x) .Call("altrep_STRING_IS_SORTED",x) I am seeing the following results in R 3.5.1/Linux: > issort(LETTERS) [1] NA > issort(as.character(1:100)) ## should return NA [1] 1 >

Hi, I'm running into a case where byte-compilation changes the semantic of a function. This is with R 3.4.0: foo <- function(x) { TRUE && x } foo(c(a=FALSE)) # [1] FALSE # OK foo(c(a=TRUE)) # [1] TRUE # OK foo(c(a=FALSE)) # a # ???? # FALSE The 3rd call returned a result that it different from the 1st call! After

Hello, In my simulation I use the try()-function to catch possible errors when fitting models. I run the simulationon a Linux-server using the command " R CMD BATCH nameOfFile.R &". When executing the code as batch-job I get the problem that the execution is halted without giving an error message. But when I run the code interactivly the error is catched by try() as it would

...4, Tierney, Luke <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote: > > Better to add this to the wishlist item. This all needs to be looked > at together, and nothing is likely to happen until after > vacation/conference season. It will disappear from everyone's radar > if it is just in R_devel. > > Best, > > luke > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2019, brodie gaslam wrote: > >> Luke, thanks for considering the issue. I would like to >> try to separate the problem into two parts, as I _think_ >> your comments address primarily part 2 below: >> >>...

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/03/2015 10:02 PM, Hsiu-Khuern Tang wrote: >> Hi, >> >> [This is a follow-up to the "New version of Rtools for Windows" thread >> in January, but I just subscribed and don't know how to reply to an >> old thread -- my apologies.] > > I am planning to

Better to add this to the wishlist item. This all needs to be looked at together, and nothing is likely to happen until after vacation/conference season. It will disappear from everyone's radar if it is just in R_devel. Best, luke On Sun, 14 Jul 2019, brodie gaslam wrote: > Luke, thanks for considering the issue.? I would like to > try to separate the problem into two parts, as I _think_ > your comments address primarily part 2 below: > > 1. How can we avoid significant and possibly crippling &...

Luke, thanks for considering the issue.? I would like to try to separate the problem into two parts, as I _think_ your comments address primarily part 2 below: 1. How can we avoid significant and possibly crippling ?? stalls on error with these non-standard calls. 2. What is the best way to view these non-standard calls. I agree that issue 2. requires further thought and discussion under a