[Rd] R Enhancements

[Marsland, John]

COM support is already available with the innovative RDCOMClient and
RDCOMServer packages from Omegahat. I have been corresponding with the
author of these packages, Duncan Temple Lang, and have been able to use them
in 'anger'. We have found the packages very stable and have successfully
connected some quite strange ActiveX components to R.

Regards,

John Marsland

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Duncan Murdoch [mailto:dmurdoch at pair.com]
> Sent: 28 May 2003 21:34
> To: mpvenkatesh at lycos.com
> Cc: r-devel at stat.math.ethz.ch
> Subject: Re: [Rd] R Enhancements
> 
> 
> On Wed, 28 May 2003 13:10:19 -0700, you wrote:
> 
> >Hi, 
> >
> >We - Venkatesh Mysore and Salvatore Paxia of the New York 
> University's Bioinformatics Group under Prof.Bud Mishra - 
> have been working on enhancements to R for a while now. 
> >
> >We're happy to announce that we have some good stuff up and 
> running now:
> >
> >1. A debuggable Microsoft Visual C version ( _MSC_VER) of 
> R-1.7.0: R-1.7.0-msc (YES !!!!)
> 
> How many changes were necessary to do this?  Was it mostly a matter of
> working out instructions to get MSVC to work, or did you need a lot of
> changes to the R source code?  Does your version pass make check?
> 
> I don't use that compiler, so I can't test any of your changes.  I'm
> not interested in maintaining multiple compiler targets, but if it's
> easy, I'd consider it (or at least try to avoid doing things that will
> make it hard for you to do it).
> 
> >2. COM/OLE-support that will allow invoking of functions 
> defined elsewhere (similar to the .ole functionality in S+): 
> R-1.7.0-msc-com
> 
> That should be put together as a package.  
> 
> >3. Minor Fixes/Extensions: R-1.7.0-msc-com-minor
> 
> In your minor extension I, could you submit a bug report showing how
> to invoke the bug, and how to fix it?  There's still time to get this
> into 1.7.1.
> 
> Could you write up a description of why the changes in II and III are
> a good idea?  I'll put them into 1.8.0 if they make sense.
> 
> Re the suggestion for a global "dont_exit" flag:  My first answer is
> that global flags are bad, we have way too many of them now.  What we
> need are bigger changes that make all of our global flags unnecessary.
> 
> Duncan Murdoch
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 


********************************************************************** 
This is a commercial communication from Commerzbank AG.\ \ This ... {{dropped}}