On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Romain François <rom...@r-enthusiasts.com>wrote: [...]
> However, in terms of wins: > - package developers would know for sure which version of the codebase is > used with their package. Once they have done testing, they don't have to be > hostage of api breakage and things like << please recompile your package, > etc ... >> > - developers of Rcpp* are less trapped by the compatibility issues, hands > are set free to innovate. > The only small downsides I see here is that (1) users potentially have to do more work to include Rcpp* in their packages (although you can just write an R function to include/update their Rcpp* versions); and that (2) source packages will be somewhat bigger. Btw. you are essentially "simulating" versioned package dependencies this way. :) The next thing to consider is that Rcpp is not just Rcpp, there are really > nice extensions like RcppArmadillo, etc ... perhaps we could setup some > tools (e.g. RcppJam) to combine several header only libraries into the end > package, instead of what we do now, which is have some headers in Rcpp, > some in RcppArmadillo, some in RcppGSL, ... with every risk of one being > outdated or out of sync with the other. Exactly. IMHO this could work well and take the pressure of both Rcpp* developers and users. Gabor
_______________________________________________ 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
