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 | [email protected] | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com _______________________________________________ Rcpp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
