[Rcpp-devel] broken package after udpate

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 17 November 2012 at 16:18, baptiste auguie wrote:
| I've tested my package with the latest Rcpp svn commit (3987) on r-forge and
| that fixes it. I'm therefore keen to just wait for the next Rcpp release; I'll
| write the CRAN maintainers to see what they want to do with temporarily broken
| cda in the meantime.

I think it is not a good idea to leave things hanging in "cannot quite build"
limbo. That is probably also what the CRAN maintainers will tell you.  You
may even risk getting relegated.

For argument's sake, could just define the function bound by the module
declaration as returning SEXP, ie

// general rotation matrix
SEXP euler(const double phi, const double theta, const double psi) {

[...]

RCPP_MODULE(cda){
       using namespace Rcpp ;
       function( "euler", &euler, "Constructs a 3x3 Euler rotation matrix" ) ;\
}

which would circumvent the issue, and work with the current not-quite-ideal
Rcpp as well as future ones?  OTOH you seem to have 14 functions defined in
cda_1.2.1 so maybe that is too much work?  

| Thanks again for the very responsive help,

Yes, that was nice late-night work by Romain.  

Sorry again for the breakage.

Dirk
 
| baptiste
| 
| 
| 
| 
| On 17 November 2012 13:13, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote:
| 
| 
|     On 17 November 2012 at 01:06, Romain Francois wrote:
|     |
|     | Le 17/11/12 00:59, baptiste auguie a écrit :
|     | > I see, thanks a lot for tracking this down.
| 
|     Seconded -- nicely done.
| 
|     | > In practical terms, should I change all such functions to use SEXP +
|     | > explicit wrap, or will you submit a new CRAN version soon enough fixing
|     | > this?
|     |
|     | I don't know.
| 
|     We are doing _a lot_ of work on Rcpp right now, so I'd say we will have a
|     new
|     release sooner rather than later -- maybe in two or three weeks. But there
|     is
|     no guarantee.
| 
|     | > Personally I don't mind waiting a bit for the CRAN fix of cda;
|     | > probably noone else uses my package and I'd rather avoid making
|     | > unnecessary workaround fixes. That being said, I would be surprised if
|     | > no other packages broke because of this.
|     |
|     | Well. We'll only know when people tell us I guess.
| 
|     With infinite time, we would have an infinite number of use cases. I think
|     we
|     have a simple case that test return of matrices, but (and I have not yet
|     checked) the include order that Romain identified is of course not
|     something
|     we check.
| 
|     Cheers, Dirk
| 
|     --
|     Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com
| 
| 

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