On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 4:06 PM, JJ Allaire <jj.alla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chistian,
>
> With sourceCpp, you can actually specify an exported function name
> explicitly in the export declaration. For example:
>
> // [[Rcpp::export("fun.class")]]Great, thanks. I hadn't tried that. I did search the Rcpp-attributes vignette for S3 and class. Maybe add a short note in section 2.5? As I said, I don't see this as a big deal :) > So this will work for sourceCpp but alas isn't currently possible for > cppFunction. One way around this for cppFunction would be to pass env > = NULL to cppFunction which will result in the function being returned > rather than added to the calling environment. You could then wrap the > returned function in an appropriately named S3 function. Cool, that makes sense. Thanks for the quick reply! -Christian > J.J. > > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Christian Gunning <x...@unm.edu> wrote: >> I just realized that cppFunction can't natively build S3 functions, since >> fun.class isn't valid C++ function name. I'm wondering if adding and >> S3class argument (default value = FALSE, otherwise class name as >> character) to cppFunction makes sense -- all that's needed is >> appending the class name to the function name, correct? The downside, >> as I see it, is that it's not so simple for sourceCpp/attributes (at >> least I don't understand them). >> >> Obviously, this is a minor issue. Is anyone else likely to hit this? >> >> best, >> Christian >> >> >> -- >> A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal – Panama! > > -- A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal – Panama! _______________________________________________ Rcpp-devel mailing list Rcpp-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
