New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

allow the syntax Matrix mat(no_init(n,nc)) #904

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@romainfrancois
Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 19, 2018

see tidyverse/dplyr#3841 (comment) for the back story.

@romainfrancois romainfrancois referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2018

Merged

use of no_init #3841

@krlmlr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

krlmlr commented Sep 27, 2018

Are the test failures related to this PR? See https://github.com/RcppCore/Rcpp/pull/904/files?utf8=%E2%9C%93&diff=split&w=1 to hide the whitespace-only changes. ChangeLog has a conflict too.

@romainfrancois

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 27, 2018

There might be a typo in the runit file

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 27, 2018

Indeed:

m <- runit_no_init_matrix_cotr()

That wanted to be ...ctor()

Trying to test before pushing is sometimes a good idea, as is opening an issue and discussing before throwing a PR over the fence without context.

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 27, 2018

I'll clean this up. Next time, please

  1. File an issue first. Establish consensus what changes be made.
  2. Send a PR. Ideally test it. Even more ideally, test reverse dependencies.

Thanks.

@romainfrancois

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 28, 2018

I open an issue when i am onto something, and it does not appear trivial to do the work immediately. For example with the Rcpp::init the other day.

Otherwise pull request are typically a much better format as they offer a way to discuss and bind additional context.

I did some testing, but then my time is a limited resource too so i tend to trust travis for the rest.

As for reverse dependency tests, i’m clearly not going to do it to test something that previously failed to compile before the changes.

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 28, 2018

This repo and project operate with a set of suggested rules which have worked well for us in the past. Issue tickets first is one of those, and we would appreciate it if you could play along just like ever other repeat contributor does.

So for this, please cherry-pick in this commit of mine into your branch and hence this PR: c9da803

@romainfrancois

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 28, 2018

Sure will do.

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 28, 2018

Sure will do.

When were you planning to do that?

@romainfrancois

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 28, 2018

I meant "I will follow the rules".

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 28, 2018

Can you please do

So for this, please cherry-pick in this commit of mine into your branch and hence this PR: c9da803

or do prefer that I close this and create a new PR?

@romainfrancois

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

romainfrancois commented Sep 28, 2018

I won't have time to do anything until next week. Please do whatever you think is best.

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Member

eddelbuettel commented Sep 28, 2018

Helpful. That takes 2 seconds.

@eddelbuettel eddelbuettel referenced this pull request Sep 28, 2018

Merged

Pr/904 #905

romainfrancois added a commit to tidyverse/dplyr that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment