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
Eliminate C code #129
Eliminate C code #129
Conversation
In favour of using rlang function with same implementation
Ooops, this makes it impossible to reload rlang |
What if we called it directly? That wouldn't implicitly load the rlang namespace again e.g. It would be nice to make pkgload R only. |
Oh interesting idea. Will that generate an R CMD check error? I'll try it out. |
Yes, this seems to work 😄 I tested it with pkgload and rlang and it seems to work. (It does take progressively longer to reload rlang each time, but that appears to be the same with CRAN pkgload) |
R/utils.R
Outdated
@@ -182,5 +182,6 @@ single_quote <- function(x) { | |||
} | |||
|
|||
unlock_environment <- function(x) { | |||
.Call(unlock_environment_, x) | |||
call <- .Call # confuse R CMD check | |||
call("rlang_env_unlock", x, PACKAGE = "rlang") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure if this is better, but an alternative way around it is
get(".Call")("rlang_env_unlock", x, PACKAGE = "rlang")
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, that's slightly nicer
Can remove |
@QuLogic CRAN adds that field; it's not something we control. |
In favour of using rlang function with same implementation