[Rcpp-devel] Loading a package using Rcpp Modules results in memory corruption

[Dominick Samperi]

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote:

>
> On 10 January 2011 at 15:39, Dominick Samperi wrote:
> |
> |
> | On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org>
> wrote:
> |
> |
> |     On 10 January 2011 at 14:55, Dominick Samperi wrote:
> |     | For those who may be tempted to release "free software," this is an
> |     | illustration of the greatest hazard. Imagine seeing your prior work
> |     | "released as deprecated" in a public CRAN repository.
> |
> |     Yes, it is surely much better to release it and then have it rot
> |     unmaintained:
> |
> |         Exhibit A: RcppTemplate
> |
> |         Exhibit B: cxxPack
> |
> |     Can't wait for your next piece of art.
> |
> |
> | Yes, I'm sure you can't wait, as when I released a major update to
> | RcppTemplate in November 2009 and you famously remarked (see
> | README from Rcpp 0.6.3, pre-Romain):
> |
> | "As of November 2009, Dominick has re-commenced maintenance of
> RcppTemplate
> | with new releases on CRAN.  This may provide a good opportunity to import
> | some new ideas into Rcpp as well, time permitting."
> |
> | When Romain joined the project he implemented many of the changes that I
> | introduced here, and much more, a nice free-ride for you.
>
> That is the same (ungrounded) insult you have hurled at us repeatedly, and
> it
> is still as wrong as it was the other times.  Give it a rest.  Whatever
> your
> code was is now in RcppClassic.  We never used anything from your
> shortlived
> RcppTemplate.
>
> | Indeed, Romain made so much progress that I reshaped cxxPack from
> | RcppTemplate, with a dependency on Rcpp.
> |
> | The reason I have not updated cxxPack is that I have been trying
> | to decide whether or not to simply incorporate all or part of Rcpp into
> | cxxPack rather than keeping the package dependency. I would have
>
> Incorporate R as well while you're at. And maybe the C library. One never
> knows.
>
> | preferred to keep the dependency and work cooperatively and
> | constructively with the Rcpp team, for the net benefit of the R
> | community, but perhaps this is no longer possible.
>
> Unless I am mistaken, you have sent one patch.  For a system / compiler
> combination not used by R itself and also of limited to no interest to
> Romain
> and myself, so we declined to use it.  That is all.  That does not
> constitute
> cooperation.
>
> If you actually sent patches we have something to look at.  But I reckon
> you
> like producing hot air much more than working on code.  Each at their own.
>
> As for 'cooperative', well, I may get to that once I stop giggling.
>

Well, since you dismiss real bug fixes as bogus, and overrule changes
(my patches) that would make Rcpp more portable and reliable, even
when Romain agrees that they could be useful, cooperation does seem
to be a joke of some kind.

Merging Rcpp into cxxPack may be the only way that I can move on to
the work that really interests me. I am open to other suggestions from
the R community...

Thanks,
Dominick


> Dirk
>
> --
> Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/rcpp-devel/attachments/20110110/bd5ceb31/attachment-0001.htm>