On Tuesday, 9 January 2024 at 19:56:38 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
I'd encourage you to approach this however you like, but for the sake of anyone else reading this, I want to correct a few points. I'm guessing you haven't spent any time understanding embedrv2.
> Regarding your R.lib file (embedrv2 and the previous version), I thought it might have something to do with Weka, the machine learning library - I got my wires crossed there. Perhaps I was reading something to do with the ML library before/while I was reading your repo. My point still stands though. I've never worked anywhere that would allow a developer to install unverified pre-compiled code from an online repo. It would pose too much of a security issue.
That's not "unverified pre-compiled code". As I said, it's an import library for Windows, from an attempt long ago to call R from D on Windows. You don't call the .dll file directly on Windows, you call the .lib file. It's the same thing you do with OpenBLAS and many other popular libraries.
> As I explained my approach is to mirror the 'design language' of Rcpp/RInside/cpp11 libraries, because its a great approach, I'm familiar with it, and so are many others. A user (including myself) will be sensitive to on-boarding and usage friction, so I my library will present a clear, familiar, and easy to use interface.
I'm familiar with Rcpp/RInside/cpp11. If you go to the CRAN page for RInside, you'll see I'm one of the authors. If you check out Dirk's 2013 book, you'll see that one of the sections in it was based on an example I gave him. I haven't done much with cpp11, but that's because I was already using D before it existed. embedrv2 does exactly the same thing. You write your D function and metaprogramming is used to create a wrapper that you can call from R without further modification.
> I didn't know about your betterr R package. I think it is a different approach from the one I would take. I think both Rcpp and in particular cpp11 have very good design approaches and continuous improvements to their design that gives me plenty to think about. They are at the cutting edge and are pushing the boundaries, and I think it would be cool to show that D can play in the same space with ease, finesse, and style.
Since you've clearly never used it and don't know how it works, why are you trashing it? I'll let anyone else judge how awkward, complicated and lacking in style it is. Here's the example from the landing page:
void main() {
// Initialization
startR();
// Generate 100 draws from a N(0.5, sd=0.1) distribution
Vector x = rnorm(100, 0.5, 0.1);
// Create a 3x2 matrix and fill the columns
auto m = Matrix(3,2);
Column(m,0) = [1.1, 2.2, 3.3];
Column(m,1) = [4.4, 5.5, 6.6];
// Calculate the inverse of the transpose
auto m2 = solve(t(m));
// Modify the second and third elements of the first column of m
m[1..$,0] = [7.7, 8.8];
// Choose x and y to minimize x^2 + y^2
// Use Nelder-Mead with initial guesses 3.5 and -5.5
auto nm = NelderMead(&f);
OptimSolution sol = nm.solve([3.5, -5.5]);
// Clean up
closeR();
}
extern(C) {
double f(int n, double * par, void * ex) {
return par[0]*par[0] + par[1]*par[1];
}
}
That's ten lines of code to generate a vector of random numbers, create and fill a matrix, take the inverse of the transpose of the matrix, mutate the matrix, and solve a nonlinear optimization problem.
I don't care that you're not using it. Have fun creating your own project. That doesn't excuse writing falsehoods about the work I've done.
Permalink
Reply
