similar to: declarations in non-exported headers and embedding R

Hi - I wrapped R.dll up using somebody code online (see below). I am comparing R on .NET IPC with R(D)COM. I got it all working. Except, I realize that in my client code of the IPC remoting, if I call 'plot' function in R via EvaluateNoReturn, I don't seem to see any results on the R plot window (although the window pops up). Is there anything to do with the code of R.dll wrapper

After a long processing, I was able to create a version of a small C# class that was able to emulate the rproxy by P/Invoke. This is mostly to find a workaround a performance problem of the StatConnector. It's almost work but ... I have strange memory exception when I call the print function. The variable seems to not survive from one call to the other. As there is no debug symbol for

A common need in R frontends is to provide some sort of read, (parse), evaluate, print loop. However, there are also a number of points where frontends may want to differ from the standard REPL as available e.g. in R_ReplDLLdo1(). First some thoughts on what is needed, and what is already there, or missing. If you want to skip over this, a short summary is provided in the second half, below

Hello. I'm still working on my OCaml-R binding and I get a segfault in the GetNewPage() function of memory.c. For the record, the OCaml-R binding seems to work fine with OCaml bytecode. The segfault here is the main issue I have with OCaml native code. OCaml-R can be found on the following links. Source code: http://yziquel.homelinux.org/gitweb/?p=ocaml-r.git;a=summary

Hello, We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp mailing list if interested [1] in the details). We are now using [2] R_PreserveObject and R_ReleaseObject to manage garbage collection instead of the PROTECT/UNPROTECT dance. This seems to work well, but I was wondering if there was documentation about it. In particular, if we preserve the same SEXP twice (or more),

Hello, This is a question that probably reveals my lack of understanding. In a C function (call it cfunc), i created a SEXP, called S, and then called R_PreserveObject on S. I returned the SEXP to the calling R function (call it rfunc). Note, I didn't call R_ReleaseObject on S. v <- .Call("cfunc") So, are the following statements correct 1. S is 'doubly' protected

[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the R source, others will correct where deemed necessary] On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-request at r-project.org wrote: > > Hello, > > We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp > mailing list if interested [1] in the details). > > We are now using [2] R_PreserveObject and R_ReleaseObject

Apologies, I am resending this because my emails seem to go in HTML form. Hello, This is a question that probably reveals my lack of understanding. In a C function (call it cfunc), i created a SEXP, called S, and then called R_PreserveObject on S. I returned the SEXP to the calling R function (call it rfunc). Note, I didn't call R_ReleaseObject on S. v <- .Call("cfunc") So,

Apologies, I am resending this because my emails seem to go in HTML form. (I haven't as yet figured gmail web interface) Hello, This is a question that probably reveals my lack of understanding. In a C function (call it cfunc), i created a SEXP, called S, and then called R_PreserveObject on S. I returned the SEXP to the calling R function (call it rfunc). Note, I didn't call

Hello. This is my first post to the list, so first I'd like to thank everybody for making and mantaining such a great product as R. I'm writting a native binding to R from Dolphin Smalltalk. I've followed up the examples of the documentation showing how to run R embedded, and I got it partially working. However, I have a problem with the reference handling of the R objects.

Dear list, I am trying to implement a publish-subscribe mechanism in for an embedded R interpreter. But somehow my registered closures seem to get collected by the GC, even though I have protected them. I have reducted my code to the following sample. Sorry if it is a little verbose. The first couple of call of calls still work, but at some point one of the callbacks (callback1 in my

Dear list, While trying to identify the root of a problem I am having with garbage collected variables, I have come across the following oddity: depending on whether --verbose is set or not, I obtain different results. I have made a small standalone example to demonstrate it. The example is very artificial, but I had a hard time reproducing reliably the problem. So when I do: (the content of

Here's an update of my rawConnection() implementation. In addition to providing a raw version of textConnection(), this fixes two existing issues with textConnection(): one is that the current textConnection() implementation carries around unprotected SEXP pointers, the other is a performance problem due to prolific copying of the output buffer as output is accumulated line by line. This new

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:45:04 +0200 Jeroen Ooms <jeroenooms at gmail.com> wrote: > Thoughts? How verboten would it be to create an empty external pointer object, add it to the preserved list, and set an on-exit finalizer to clean up the curl multi-handle? As far as I can tell, the internet module is not supposed to be unloaded, so this would not introduce an opportunity to jump to an

Dear List, When I try to parse code containing newline characters with R_ParseVector, I get a compilation error. How can I compile code that includes comments and newlines? I am using the following: void* my_compile(char *code) { SEXP cmdSexp, cmdExpr = R_NilValue; ParseStatus status; PROTECT (cmdSexp = allocVector (STRSXP, 1)); SET_STRING_ELT (cmdSexp, 0, mkChar (code));

>>> On Nov 28, 2009, at 7:50 PM, Guillaume Yziquel wrote: >>> >>> FWIW what I think you should be really looking at is >>> R_PreserveObject/R_ReleaseObject. > > OK. Thanks. >>> I would suggest looking at the many other R embeddings in other >>> languages that already exist since I don't think you approach is >>> very viable

On 4/25/24 17:01, Ivan Krylov via R-devel wrote: > On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:45:04 +0200 > Jeroen Ooms <jeroenooms at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thoughts? > How verboten would it be to create an empty external pointer object, > add it to the preserved list, and set an on-exit finalizer to clean up > the curl multi-handle? As far as I can tell, the internet module is not >

Dear all, my aim is to integrate R in an interactive visualisation software called Bulk Analyzer developed by VrVis (http://www.vrvis.at). the code: SEXP e, tmp; ParseStatus status; PROTECT(tmp = mkString("x <- c(1.234,-3.45)")); PrintValue(tmp); PROTECT(e = R_ParseVector(tmp, -1, &status, R_NilValue)); PrintValue(e); UNPROTECT(2); produces the following output: [1] "x

Hi all, I am using R-3.0.1 under Linux platform to embed R into my C++ code. I am facing an error while executing more than 1 R-expressions parallelly. I am executing round(X) and abs(X) parallelly on a set of 50 input rows which resulted in segmentation fault after getting the following errors. Error: unprotect_ptr: pointer not found Error: argument to 'findVar' is not an environment

Hello! This is my first post here. I came across the very same problem. It can be reproduced within modified tests/Embedding/RParseEval.c Actually this example has another issue, namely it doesn't wrap everything in R_ToplevelExec . This is a major show stopper for newcomers as that function is barely mentioned anywhere and longjmp into terminated setuploop function followed by R_suicide