similar to: Calling R_PreserveObject from embedded R

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),

[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

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

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

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

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

Hi - any person interested in building a binding between Smalltalk and R, please contact myself or Hernan. This could be done as the Google Summer of Code (GSoC). http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2012 http://gsoc2012.esug.org/projects/r-statistics For those who don't know Smalltalk it is an Object Oriented language that was created back in the '80s in the Xerox

Hello, I've been using R embedded in PL/R (R procedural language handler for PostgreSQL, http://www.joeconway.com/plr/) very successfully for several months now. A sincere "thank you" goes to the R development team for such a great product. I have a question I'm hoping someone here can help me with. In order to get the required functionality out of PL/R, I've had to

Back in the horse-and-buggy days when I was cutting my OO eye teeth on Smalltalk, we had a LOT of conversations about the biggest problem dealing with a large and growing set of classes and methods in the Smalltalk image. It became clear that most, if not all, successful Smalltalk coders spent a lot of their time code-shopping, i.e., looking for a class or method that did something they

>>>>> "K" == Kasper Daniel Hansen <khansen at stat.Berkeley.EDU> writes: K> On Oct 19, 2005, at 3:43 PM, Jeffrey J. Hallman wrote: K> <SNIP> >> Think about it. Once you have a basic math package that can handle >> matrix >> programming and various mathematical functions, building the various >> statistical modeling

I posted this to comp.lang.ruby and comp.lang.smalltalk, and my blog. I will likely get destroyed, but it will be worth it if at least one nugget of information helps the Ruby IDE makers. ----------------------------------------- Hi all -- I shout my question to the entire Ruby + Smalltalk community: Smalltalk has had amazing IDEs for decades, why not Ruby? Smalltalkers, Ruby needs your help!

Hi, I am trying to figure a way to allocate a string SEXP so that gc() won't ever collect it. Here is a little bit of a background. Suppose I want to write a .Call-callable function that upon each call returns the same value, say mkChar("foo"): SEXP getFoo() { return mkChar("foo"); } The above implementation doesn't take advantage of the fact that

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

Hello, I have problems with this spec controllers: http://pastie.caboo.se/68634 when I run: rake spec:controllers I get this error: ...............F...... 1) ''DocTypeController should update and redirect to show'' FAILED expected redirect to {:action=>"show", :id=>1}, got redirect to

Hello, I haven''t been able to create a controller spec. You can see the code here: http://pastie.caboo.se/67980 The error message I''m getting is: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in ''PersonController should tell the Person model to create a new person on POST to create'' Mock ''person'' received unexpected message :save with (no args)

Hi! We?ve recently come across an example where a package (minqa) creates an Rcpp Function object in a static variable. This causes R_ReleaseObject to be called by the destructor at a very late point in time - as part of the system exit function: static Function cf("c"); I?m wondering if that is considered to be ?safe?? Is the R engine supposed to stay in a state where calls to API

>>> 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

Hi Guys! I just joined this list after James helped me out in ruby-talk to mock a http get request for a project I have running :) Now comes the second question... I was fiddling around, making the mocking with the get request work (which turned out to me pretty easy), but then I ran into another problem. I was faced with mocking the post request, so I thought I could do it the same way

I've written a Smalltalk application which starts R on another machine and then communicates with it via sockets. The functions involved are: slaveStart <- function(masterHost, masterPort){ inPort <- availablePort() sendSocket(as.character(inPort), masterHost, masterPort) socketSlave(inPort) } socketSlave <- function(inPort){ ## listens on inPort.