I recently got an email from CRAN regarding MKL issues for an R package I
submitted in November. Does anyone have any advice on fixing issues with MKL? I
want to install it locally so I can test locally, instead of guessing at the
problem and uploading to CRAN with the hope that I correctly iden
ify (maybe by linking back to an earlier thread, don't
> remember if you discussed this previously) what you mean by "I realized that
> because all.equal() does not test (even as a proxy) that the same
> calculations were done"?
>
>
> On Tue, May 13, 2025, 1:05 P
at I can understand of your questions so far, you are
> asking for something that is not possible in general.
>
> Can you clarify further please?
>
> cheers
> Ben Bolker
>
>
>
> On 5/13/25 15:08, smallepsilon wrote:
>
> > Ben,
> >
> > The
On Wednesday, May 14th, 2025 at 10:51 AM, Tim Taylor
wrote:
> I'd just use all.equal but I think you could just check the call is
> constructed correctly, e.g.
>
> convenient_modify_matrix <- function(mat) modify_matrix(mat, other_args =
> default)
>
> identical(
> body(convenient_modify_mat
On Wednesday, May 14th, 2025 at 10:33 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel
wrote:
>
>
> Section 'A.3.1.3 Intel MKL' of the R Installation and Administration manual
> covers that for the MKL case (and general OpenMP cases)
>
> The default number of threads will be chosen by the OpenMP software, but
> c
On Wednesday, May 14th, 2025 at 12:59 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 12:46 PM Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org wrote:
>
> > [ If you could, please set your email software up such that posts to a
> > mailing lists are not signed, it makes reading them more cumbersome. It
>
On Wednesday, May 14th, 2025 at 2:51 PM, Ivan Krylov
wrote:
> > My submission was rejected, not because of test failures, but because
> > I had "removed the failing tests which is not the idea of tests." No
> > errors/warnings/notes were reported to me.
>
>
> Try measuring the test coverage of
