Thanks.
The intention with the new, more flexible, constructors was that a
default constructor was not required. But I have to admit that I have
not experimented too much with inheritance, either on the C++ side (last
remaining item on the TODO list for modules) or on the R side.
Romain
Le
There was a problem in that creating a subclass in R of an Rcpp class
attempts to call a default constructor.
I have code that fixed the problem, by creating a suitable $initialize()
method based on the existence or not of the default C++ constructor, but
unfortunately I have yet to fully test
I believe it is now recommended that a class to be exposed in a module
should expose a default constructor (i.e. a constructor called with no
arguments). Is such a constructor actually called or is it just there
to establish the necessary linkage? In a class where it would not
make sense to const
