Implement complex support #2
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
DavisVaughan
force-pushed
the
feature/data-pointer
branch
from
84ff462 to
d6b750b
Compare
DavisVaughan
force-pushed
the
feature/data-pointer-complex
branch
from
c30fc36 to
8d998d1
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r_complex(SEXP data)really needed? I added this because it exists forr_bool, but it seems a little limited. It converts a complex length 1 SEXP tor_complexand errors otherwise. It seems like this is rare (I think ther_boolcase is actually untested and broken). And ther_string(SEXP data)equivalent is quite different, because this is how you go fromCHARSXP->r_string