Le 2013-09-20 14:24, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit :
Just to bring closure to this thread: Per Section 1.7 of the "Writing
R
Extensions" manual, the 'C++98' standard, without any C99 extensions,
is
prescribed by CRAN.
That is not the way I read it. It says to use the tools given by the
compiler to find potential problems.
Fine. Done that. Identified the portability problem, dealing with it
with conditional compilation. Prooving it. Not good enough ?
As people might have seen on other channels (twitter). I'm forking Rcpp
into Rcpp11. This will be a version that enforces C++11.
I'm not expecting to be able to distribute Rcpp11 on CRAN, but Dirk
probably will keep maintaining Rcpp.
I'll have to figure out where and how to distribute Rcpp11. It should
not be too hard to come up with a repository that complies with
install.packages.
CRAN is an amazing resource and a huge part of the success of R. Rcpp11
will need a different repo, so be it. Maybe in the long run, I'll be
able to show that it was worth experimenting on C++11, maybe not. I'm
just moving away from this problem.
Romain
PS: I'm still interested in some constructive discussion about the
original question.
That explicitly excludes long long. So we are back to where we were
years
ago: you only get 'long long' in Rcpp if you enable the '-std=c++11'
(or
-std=c++0x') extensions not allowed at CRAN.
Sadly, two of the R manuals also (falsely) claim that no C++11
compliant
compilers exist. That changed in the summer of 2013, and I plan to
file a bug
report against the manuals once R 3.0.2 is out next week.
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Rcpp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
