Hello,
We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp
mailing list if interested [1] in the details).
We are now using [2] R_PreserveObject and R_ReleaseObject to manage
garbage collection instead of the PROTECT/UNPROTECT dance. This seems to
work well, but I was wonderin
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> I'm not complaining that it is not documented.
Yes but you didn't answer my question. When you ask a question on
these (or any mailing lists) you should always say what efforts you've
made to answer the question. I first looked in the help for '[
Greetings and happy new year!
I am in the process of converting some of the old S-PLUS scripts from
Visualizing Data (Cleveland, 1993)
into lattice. In fact, I did most of it several years ago, and at the time,
all of the scripts that contained
loess() worked fine. Tonight, I ran most of the scrip
Dennis Murphy wrote:
Greetings and happy new year!
I am in the process of converting some of the old S-PLUS scripts from
Visualizing Data (Cleveland, 1993)
into lattice. In fact, I did most of it several years ago, and at the time,
all of the scripts that contained
loess() worked fine. Tonight
Dennis,
I have no problems with this on my DELL laptop (still running
Vista) with R version 2.10.1 Patched (2009-12-21 r50796).
-Peter Ehlers
Dennis Murphy wrote:
Greetings and happy new year!
I am in the process of converting some of the old S-PLUS scripts from
Visualizing Data (Cleveland,
The posting guide also applies to R-devel: please provide a complete
reproducible example and don't send HTML, as requested there.
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Dennis Murphy wrote:
Greetings and happy new year!
I am in the process of converting some of the old S-PLUS scripts
from Visualizing Data (Cl
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the R
source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
Hello,
We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp
mailing list if interested [1] in the
Thanks.
On 01/02/2010 05:36 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the R
source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
Hello,
We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the R
source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
Hello,
We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the o
On Jan 2, 2010, at 5:07 AM, Romain Francois wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp mailing
> list if interested [1] in the details).
>
> We are now using [2] R_PreserveObject and R_ReleaseObject to manage garbage
> collection instead of the PROT
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
R source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
(...)
I'd also be int
On 01/02/2010 06:01 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 5:07 AM, Romain Francois wrote:
Hello,
We are currently making lots of changes to Rcpp (see the open Rcpp mailing list
if interested [1] in the details).
We are now using [2] R_PreserveObject and R_ReleaseObject to manage garb
On 01/02/2010 05:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
R source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
Hello,
We are curr
On 1/2/10 5:50 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
Thanks.
On 01/02/2010 05:36 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the R
source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
On 1/2/10 12:00 PM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
(...)
In
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
> On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>> On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>> [Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
>>> R source, others will correct where deemed necessary]
>>>
>>> On 1/2/10 1
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
R source, others will correct where deemed nece
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
R source, other
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from reading the
R source, others wil
On 1/2/10 8:28 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my understanding from
reading the R source, others will correct where deemed
Romain,
Is the use of UNPROTECT_PTR discouraged? I wonder why you haven't
considered using it instead.
I have a similar project that uses a ref counting scheme and handles
the deletion of the shared object with UNPROTECT_PTR. This method has
been working fine, but if there are reasons I should
On 2 January 2010 at 16:26, Whit Armstrong wrote:
| I still think all these Rcpp projects should come together some day.
| Dirk and I talked about combining about two years ago, but "real" work
| got it the way. I'll ping you off list for a follow up.
Have a look at the SVN archive for Rcpp on R
On 01/02/2010 10:26 PM, Whit Armstrong wrote:
Romain,
Is the use of UNPROTECT_PTR discouraged? I wonder why you haven't
considered using it instead.
that's not what I said. It just felt not as easy to use as just grab a
SEXP and say R_PreserveObject( x ) and then later R_ReleaseObject.
I
Romain,
> that's not what I said. It just felt not as easy to use as just grab a SEXP
> and say R_PreserveObject( x ) and then later R_ReleaseObject.
Didn't mean to suggest that you said that. I was asking the list
whether it's discouraged.
Will follow up on the Rcpp list.
-Whit
_
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 02:50:00PM -0500, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Dec 31, 2009, at 10:05 AM, Jens Elkner wrote:
>
> > OT: Wondering, what does "recommended portable encoding names" in this
> > context mean (e.g. AFAIK 'latin1' is not a standardized name ...).
>
> It is in R -- since no stand
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
[Disclaimer: what is below reflects my unde
On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wro
On 01/02/2010 11:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wr
On 1/2/10 11:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 6:35 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 11:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrot
On Jan 2, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
> On 1/2/10 8:28 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/2/10 5:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 11:36 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
> [Disclaimer: what is below reflects my
On Jan 2, 2010, at 5:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
> On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>
>> On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>> On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
> On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
>> On
On Jan 2, 2010, at 5:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
> On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>
>> On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>> On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
> On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
>> On
On 01/03/2010 02:04 AM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 5:41 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
On 01/02/2010 11:12 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 02/01/2010 3:16 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
On 1/2/10 8:53 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Laurent G
33 matches
Mail list logo
