<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:44 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:edd@debian.org">edd@debian.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im"><br>
On 16 November 2010 at 23:28, Dominick Samperi wrote:<br>
| I explained already how anyone who cares can do a diff and resolve<br>
| this objectively.<br>
<br>
</div>Please show us such a diff and put some proof into this pudding.<br>
<br>
Or else stop harping about a non-existing issue. Time to "put up or shut up".<br>
<div class="im"><br>
| after Nov 2009, so Rcpp today is a different animal. This thread started<br>
| with your remark that my prior work, work that is the foundation for<br>
| the current Rcpp package, was left "dead and rotting." The purpose<br>
| of my reply was to correct this misleading remark.<br>
<br>
</div>Not it wasn't. I will stand by "dead and rotting".<br>
<br>
Look, it's simple. RQuantLib was always a user of Rcpp, and I can assure you<br>
that by late 2008 your code __which had not been touched in 2 years__ no<br>
longer even compiled under current g++ versions. I was using it. I believe<br>
CRAN had even moved the package off the main page as it didn't build, and you<br>
obviously didn't care for it. So I fixed that and started making extensions;<br>
see the ChangeLog for the initial changes as well as everything we all did<br>
since. The per-project SVN commit counter for Rcpp is now at over 2400.<br>
That's 2400 individual changesets, sometimes small and sometimes large. In<br>
the space of two years. Whereas you left RcppTemplate without single<br>
character changes in three years when it didn't even build. That's what I<br>
call "dead and rotting".<br>
<br>
And I for one do not think it is a coincidence that you come back another<br>
year later bringing the rot to then _three years_ with a short-lived<br>
update. And I suspect that without the ongoing Rcpp work you would never have<br>
done that brief camoe re-appearance of RcppTemplate.<br>
<br>
Anyway, "dead and rotting" it was and yes, please do provide proof for your<br>
allegations.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br>I have already provided proof in the form of your own words Dirk. The<br>quote from Rcpp 0.8.3 that was cited earlier in this thread first appeared<br>in Rcpp 0.6.7 (released Nov 8, 2009), shortly after my release of<br>
RcppTemplate 6.1 (release Nov 6, 2009), and before Romain joined<br>the Rcpp project. Thus if anybody cares to diff, the relevant versions<br>are Rcpp 0.6.7 and RcppTemplate 6.1 (the name RcppTemplate was<br>chosen to limit confusion between the package name and the<br>
library name, BTW).<br><br>I wonder how the authors of the recently released neural network package<br>
would feel if they saw another package author make similar remarks just<br>
days after the release of their hard work, followed by a wholesale<br>effort to reimplement their work in another package.<br>
<br>On Rcpp::as and Rcpp::wrap, the first is alternate syntax ("sugar")<br>for a C++ SEXP constructor, and the function of Rcpp::wrap was performed<br>by what I called getSEXP(). There was also some use of STL classes<br>
to facilitate streaming C++ to R objects. My versions were in the prototype<br>phase, not as comprehensive as what was implemented later by<br>Romain, but the main ideas were there in RcppTemplate.<br><br>Shortly after the release of my work others joined the Rcpp team, the<br>
pace of development increased dramatically, and it became clear that<br>to avoid wasting my time I needed to take my work in a different<br>direction, so I withdrew RcppTemplate and created cxxPack.<br><br>It is ironic that cxxPack is actually just the underlying plumbing for<br>
number of packages that I have developed over the years and was planning<br>to release to CRAN, but I have been somewhat reluctant to do this<br>in view of my experiences with Rcpp/cxxPack.<br><br>Finally, who decides when a package is "dead and rotting"? The<br>
person who wants to take it over?<br><br>Dominick<br><br></div></div>