Re: [Rd] Package size NOTE in R CMD check

2013-10-28 Thread Prof Brian Ripley
On 29/10/2013 00:19, Gábor Csárdi wrote: How does one "fix" this: R CMD check --as-cran --timings igraph_0.6.5.999-54.tar.gz ... * checking installed package size ... NOTE installed size is 5.9Mb sub-directories of 1Mb or more: libs 4.0Mb ... Are maintainers expected to break

Re: [Rd] R 3.1.0 and C++11

2013-10-28 Thread romain
Le 2013-10-29 03:01, Whit Armstrong a écrit : I would love to see optional c++0x support added for R. c++0x was the name given for when this was in development. Now c++11 is a published standard backed by implementations by major compilers. people need to stop calling it c++0x If there is a

Re: [Rd] R 3.1.0 and C++11

2013-10-28 Thread Whit Armstrong
I would love to see optional c++0x support added for R. If there is anything I can do to help, please let me know. Sincerely, Whit On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > Hi Martyn, > > On 7 October 2013 at 21:18, Martyn Plummer wrote: > | I don't see any harm in allowin

[Rd] Package size NOTE in R CMD check

2013-10-28 Thread Gábor Csárdi
How does one "fix" this: R CMD check --as-cran --timings igraph_0.6.5.999-54.tar.gz ... * checking installed package size ... NOTE installed size is 5.9Mb sub-directories of 1Mb or more: libs 4.0Mb ... Are maintainers expected to break up the package in this case? I can see that t

Re: [Rd] interrupting Sweave leaves open sink connection

2013-10-28 Thread Michael Sumner
Thanks very much, confirmed in Windows in R-patched (r64110) and R-devel (r64116). Cheers, Mike. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:48 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 13-10-22 10:45 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: >> >> On 13-10-22 9:45 PM, Michael Sumner wrote: >>> >>> Hello, if I interrupt Sweave while it's

Re: [Rd] R CMD check problem with R 3.0.2

2013-10-28 Thread Yihui Xie
I understand these reasons, and they certainly make sense when a package has a big/complicated src/ directory. Perhaps one day more developers will move the building and checking to cloud services (e.g. I have been using Travis CI), so nobody cares about the building/checking time spent on local ma

Re: [Rd] missing documentation entries ... WARNING

2013-10-28 Thread Luis Rodriguez
Aha… I think I have taken care of this. My team just realized that a class level documentation Rd file is required… I have created this with calls to the methods section, itemized… and we seem to be good to go. Thanks! ~luis On Oct 28, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Luis Rodriguez wrote: > Dear Duncan an

Re: [Rd] missing documentation entries ... WARNING

2013-10-28 Thread Luis Rodriguez
Dear Duncan and R-devel, This advice has cleared my "checking Rd \usage sections" warning—but I am not sure I did a good job taking your advice as I cleared this by modifying the alias statements, but not invoking \S3method or \S4method. Thus, I am still a bit stumped on my "checking for missi

Re: [Rd] R CMD check problem with R 3.0.2

2013-10-28 Thread Martin Maechler
> Duncan Murdoch > on Sun, 27 Oct 2013 08:56:31 -0400 writes: > On 13-10-26 9:49 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote: >> On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Yihui Xie wrote: >> >>> This has been asked s many times that I think it may >>> be a good idea for R CMD check to just s

Re: [Rd] R CMD check issue with R 3.0.2

2013-10-28 Thread Terry Therneau
On 10/28/2013 06:00 AM, r-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: On 13-10-26 9:49 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote: > On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Yihui Xie wrote: > >> This has been asked s many times that I think it may be a good >> idea for R CMD check to just stop when the user passes a direct