[Rcpp-devel] Dependence on GNU make because of $(shell)

Dirk Eddelbuettel edd at debian.org
Wed Nov 17 13:44:30 CET 2010


On 16 November 2010 at 23:28, Dominick Samperi wrote:
| I explained already how anyone who cares can do a diff and resolve
| this objectively. 

Please show us such a diff and put some proof into this pudding. 

Or else stop harping about a non-existing issue.  Time to "put up or shut up".

| after Nov 2009, so Rcpp today is a different animal. This thread started
| with your remark that my prior work, work that is the foundation for
| the current Rcpp package, was left "dead and rotting." The purpose
| of my reply was to correct this misleading remark.

Not it wasn't. I will stand by "dead and rotting".

Look, it's simple. RQuantLib was always a user of Rcpp, and I can assure you
that by late 2008 your code __which had not been touched in 2 years__ no
longer even compiled under current g++ versions. I was using it. I believe
CRAN had even moved the package off the main page as it didn't build, and you
obviously didn't care for it.  So I fixed that and started making extensions;
see the ChangeLog for the initial changes as well as everything we all did
since. The per-project SVN commit counter for Rcpp is now at over 2400.
That's 2400 individual changesets, sometimes small and sometimes large. In
the space of two years.  Whereas you left RcppTemplate without single
character changes in three years when it didn't even build. That's what I
call "dead and rotting".  

And I for one do not think it is a coincidence that you come back another
year later bringing the rot to then _three years_ with a short-lived
update. And I suspect that without the ongoing Rcpp work you would never have
done that brief camoe re-appearance of RcppTemplate.

Anyway, "dead and rotting" it was and yes, please do provide proof for your
allegations.  

Dirk

-- 
Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com


More information about the Rcpp-devel mailing list