[Rcpp-devel] Inline (ghost from the devel still walks?)

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 27 October 2010 at 23:31, Kaveh Vakili wrote:
| Thanks again. One last question, i have some codes written last year by a colleague 'the other way' (in c++ using RInside) that i can partially use. 
| Can you make some (necessarily very general) comments on the performance gap between the two approaches (i.e. inline and RInside), all else equal. 

Not really.  I prefer testing and profiling, rather than wild guesses.
 
| In other words, inline seems more convenient/flexible than using Rinside. Does this convenience comes with large costs ?

Well, first off, they are no substitutes.  

"inline" is attractive for development and prototyping, but not for final
package building and eventual deployment. For that, 'package.skeleton()' can
almost auto-build a package for you given a set of inline-created functions.
We have a pending fix to inline in SVN for the corner case of a single
function passed to package.skeleton().

"RInside" is meant for, well, R inside C++ apps.  Different beast.

Not sure if that answers your question -- but the two really do not compare
besides both involving R, C++ and Rcpp.

Hth. Dirk

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