similar to: Objects not gc'ed due to caching (?) in R's S3 dispatch mechanism

I have committed a change to R-devel that addresses this. To be on the safe side I need to run some more extensive tests before deciding if this can be ported to the release branch for R 3.5.0. Should know in a day or two. Best, luke On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote: > This has nothing to do with printing or dispatch per se. It is the > result of an internal register

2018-03-27 11:11 GMT+02:00 Tomas Kalibera <tomas.kalibera at gmail.com>: > On 03/27/2018 09:51 AM, I?aki ?car wrote: >> >> 2018-03-27 6:02 GMT+02:00 <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu>: >>> >>> This has nothing to do with printing or dispatch per se. It is the >>> result of an internal register (R_ReturnedValue) being protected. It >>> gets

2018-03-27 6:02 GMT+02:00 <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu>: > This has nothing to do with printing or dispatch per se. It is the > result of an internal register (R_ReturnedValue) being protected. It > gets rewritten whenever there is a jump, e.g. by an explicit return > call. So a simplified example is > > new_foo <- function() { > e <- new.env() >

This has nothing to do with printing or dispatch per se. It is the result of an internal register (R_ReturnedValue) being protected. It gets rewritten whenever there is a jump, e.g. by an explicit return call. So a simplified example is new_foo <- function() { e <- new.env() reg.finalizer(e, function(e) message("Finalizer called")) e } bar <- function(x)

On 03/27/2018 09:51 AM, I?aki ?car wrote: > 2018-03-27 6:02 GMT+02:00 <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu>: >> This has nothing to do with printing or dispatch per se. It is the >> result of an internal register (R_ReturnedValue) being protected. It >> gets rewritten whenever there is a jump, e.g. by an explicit return >> call. So a simplified example is >> >>

Could of requests: 1) Is there any example or writeup on the difficulties of extending reference classes across packages? Just so I can fully understand the issues. 2) In what sorts of situations does the performance of reference classes cause problems? Sure, it's an order of magnitude slower than constructing a simple environment, but those timings are in microseconds, so one would need a

> > >> I've done some more investigation into the problem, and it is very difficult to pin down. What it looks like is happening is roughly like this: - `p` is an environment and `p$e` is also an environment. - There is a loop. In each iteration, it looks for one item in `p$e`, saves it in a variable `x`, then removes that item from `p$e`. Then it invokes `x()`. The loop runs

) On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > > >>>>> Winston Chang <winstonchang1 at gmail.com> > >>>>> on Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:29:40 -0500 writes: > > > I've done some more investigation into the problem, and it is very > > difficult to pin down. What it looks like is

I have a couple of packages (?fiery? and ?reqres') that uses a mock of a rook request for their examples. The mock is an R6 object containing a rawConnection, along with a finalizer that closes this connection when the object is removed. So far so good. I?ve recently been getting CRAN errors due to the rawConnection not being closed in examples > cleanEx() Error: connections left open:

When running R CMD check on a package, we are encountering an error on R-devel (as of 72457) on Linux. Unfortunately, it is very hard to reproduce, and almost any change to the code makes the error go away. I believe that this is due to a bug in R-devel, which has been present since at least commit 72128 (on 2017-02-06). The test error occurs when R CMD check is run on Travis CI (on Ubuntu

Hi, I've been working on a Blackfin backend (llvm-3.6.0) based on the previous one that was removed in llvm-3.1. llc generates codes like this: 29 p1 = r2; 30 r5 = [p1]; 31 p1 = r2; 32 r6 = [p1 + 4]; 33 r5 = r6 + r5; 34 r6 = [p0 + -4]; 35 r5 *= r6; 36 p1 = r2; 37 r6 = [p1 + 8]; 38 p1 = r2; p1 and r2 are in different register classes. A p*

I'm getting an R CMD check warning with a package (call it package A) that defines an S3 method but not the generic. The generic is defined in another package (package B). Package A imports the S3 generic from B. And there's one additional detail: the generic overrides a function in the stats package. I've created a minimal test package which reproduces the problem:

Hello, I?m trying to leverage R_ToplevelExec to implement C level try/catch. The way it is implemented allows for running a function in a top level context. This context gets an empty handler stack, so either the function runs correctly or it jumps. When it jumps, it does not find a handler, so it jumps to the top level context. R does not allow me to call begin context and end context

La verdad es que todas las aportaciones son muy muy interesantes, MI pregunta siguiente: Habeis usado R para programar orientado a objetos alguna vez? Porque yo hago mucho scripting.... Supongo que por mi mala calidad como programador... Jes?s ________________________________ De: Carlos Ortega <cof en qualityexcellence.es> Enviado: domingo, 9 de diciembre de 2018 21:07 Para: Jes?s Para

On 2 May 2017 at 23:59, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > That's interesting. Usually your code wouldn't be gc'ed because your entire > code is reachable from _start. Baremetal doesn't need a _start. > Does your program depend on the feature that, if no -e option is given, the > linker sets the beginning of the .text section to the entry point address?

Y para completar, también existen las reference class o las más modernas R6. https://adv-r.hadley.nz/r6.html Que se parecen más a los lenguajes más orientados a objetos, con sus herencias y demás historias. dom., 9 dic. 2018 17:23, Carlos J. Gil Bellosta <cgb en datanalytics.com> escribió: > Hola, ¿qué tal? > > S3 es un sistema de clases bastante primitivo. Está pensado

The winbind now works...my getent passwd & groups returns the domain users/groups What should be the next step? my clients (Win2K & Win9x) are still prompting for a password and I cannot login to my linux box using DOMAIN*domainuser. Must I add each domain user as a user on the linux box? Regards Winston Nimchan -----Original Message----- From: Sean Trammell

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:33:14PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > Hi, > > (replying here since v2 of the series does not have this explanation.) > > On Tuesday, 1 August 2017 16:00:15 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > We'd like to use PCRE instead of the awful Str module. However I > > don't necessarily want to pull in the extra dependency of ocaml-pcre, >

Awesome! I got lld running but it GCed all my sections away. :-) I'll keep experimenting with it. ~Scott On Mon, May 1, 2017, at 07:11 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 30 April 2017 at 23:47, Scott Shawcroft via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Ok, thanks! I got it going that way. I'd still love to hear from anyone > > off list working on similar

Hi all, I got a silly bug when compiling our project with the latest Clang. Here's the outputted assembly: > tst r3, #255 > strbeq r6, [r7] > ldreq r6, [r4, r6, lsl #2] > strne r6, [r7, #4] > ldr r6, [r4, r6, lsl #2] > bx r6 For the code to execute correctly, either the _ldr_ should be a _ldrne_ instruction or the _ldreq_ instruction should be removed. The error seems to