[Rcpp-devel] question re: LdFlags, RcppLdFlags

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 10 October 2013 at 02:56, Romain Francois wrote:
| Le 10/10/13 02:41, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit :
| >
| > (Combining two of your emails)
| >
| > On 10 October 2013 at 01:08, Romain Francois wrote:
| > | RcppGSL does not export its LdFlags, if it did, you'd see the warning
| > | when you load it.
| >
| > Good catch ... but turns out I don't (to my surprise).
| 
| Yes; My mistake. almost 3 am here :/

Understood.  

But also -- "this may yet be different": For RcppGSL, CFlags() and LdFlags()
export the -I... and -L... -l... values for _the GNU GSL_ and not for us. I
think I once wrote that to help package mvabund which of course still doesn't
use it (and still uses a bunch of should-be-replaced fragments, but heck, not
my package).

So nothing actually used this until ... I got RcppZiggurat version 0.0.1 onto
CRAN on Sunday.  So I can say with a straight face that the functions are
used on CRAN (and made linking to the GSL a total breeze, incl Windows builds
via win-builder etc).

| > | Why would you import Rcpp's LdFlags inside RcppGSL's namespace, you
| > | don't use it there.
| >
| > R CMD check did complain, I guess it must grep for src/ to find it in
| > Makevars. Once I imported the complaint went away.
| 
| If this fixes something for you, that's fine. I just don't get why you 
| would import something you don't use.

To make R CMD check happy, mostly.  As I said in this thread. I was quite
fine with how we use ':::' here.  "They were not."  So I cope and adapt.
 
| What makes sense to me now is both Rcpp and RcppGSL exporting their own 
| LdFlags. Having RcppGSL import the one from Rcpp makes no sense to me. 
| But if it makes R CMD check happy.

It's all pretty odd, see above.

Now: does dplyrRcpp actually export its library?  Who would link against it?
 
| Soon they are going to rename it R CMD ChuckNorris

Saw your tweet. Quite.
 
| > Generally speaking, and as I understand recent r-devel threads, Imports: and
| > importFrom(...) is how we are supposed to work with NAMESPACEs now.  That is
| > also what I did here, and what you roundly mocked one email ago (see above).
| 
| I'm sorry you preceived mockery.

Well, that's how your tone comes across a lot lately over on my end. But then
neither one of us is a native speaker in the language we use to communicate,
so their may be some loss in the signal.

Dirk
 

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