Hi Joshua and Peter,
Thank you so much for your help. Yes, it's definitely my mistake in
mixing R and c++ function calls...
I think I can fix the problems now.
Thank you once again,
Wenchao
On 3/24/2018 7:31 PM, peter dalgaard wrote:
On 25 Mar 2018, at 00:42 , Wenchao Ma wrote:
arm
> On 25 Mar 2018, at 00:42 , Wenchao Ma wrote:
>
>arma::vec Pj = Calc_Pj(par = par, designMj = designMj, linkfunc =
> linkfunc, boundary = boundary, eps = eps);
I was never any good at C++, but that syntax looks like R code. Does C++ allow
tag=value argument specification? Aren't all the
On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Wenchao Ma wrote:
> Dear Duncan,
>
> Thank you. I really appreciate your help!
>
> Yes, the Fedora warning is self explanatory, but I'm still quite confused.
> Below are part of my Mstep.cpp file (both functions are in the same file).
> The fedora warned me that, a
Dear Duncan,
Thank you. I really appreciate your help!
Yes, the Fedora warning is self explanatory, but I'm still quite
confused. Below are part of my Mstep.cpp file (both functions are in the
same file). The fedora warned me that, among others,
Mstep.cpp:62:69: warning: explicitly assigning v
On 24/03/2018 9:28 AM, Wenchao Ma wrote:
Dear all,
I just submitted a package to CRAN. It went well on my computer and
winbuilder, but produced warning and error messages on some linux and
solaris systems, as shown here:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_GDINA.html
Does anyone
Dear all,
I just submitted a package to CRAN. It went well on my computer and
winbuilder, but produced warning and error messages on some linux and
solaris systems, as shown here:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_GDINA.html
Does anyone know what is going on here?
Thanks a
This is more likely an issue with the win-builder server than an issue with
3.3.3, as I uploaded a prior version of my package that previously (in
January) had a clean check and it returned the same NOTE. I believe this
error stems from GitHub discontinuing support on Feb 22nd for the
cryptographic
Sorry, I forgot: We don't switch until _release_ of 3.5.0, four weeks further
down the line. Still, it doesn't seem worth it making much of a fuss about
3.3.3.
-pd
> On 24 Mar 2018, at 10:10 , peter dalgaard wrote:
>
> Given that R-oldrelease will become 3.4.4 when we branch for 3.5.0 on Mond
Given that R-oldrelease will become 3.4.4 when we branch for 3.5.0 on Monday,
perhaps you could just wait it out?
-pd
> On 23 Mar 2018, at 17:59 , Tyler wrote:
>
> I am getting a NOTE only on R-oldrelease when checking my package on
> win-builder:
>
> * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ...
