[R-pkg-devel] Possible R CMD check extensions (Was: Possibly mis-spelled words in DESCRIPTION)

Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com
Sun May 8 17:15:40 CEST 2016

On 08/05/2016 10:47 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 8 May 2016 at 16:18, Uwe Ligges wrote:
> | On 08.05.2016 16:13, carlos cinelli wrote:
> | > How should I proceed in this case?
> |
> | Submit to CRAN.
> The deeper question is if 'we all' can have a conversation about extending
> the directory layout / format to add things to the packaging infrastructure.
> What comes to mind is e.g.
>    - a spell-checker white list (per Carlos' initial email)
>    - more generally, 'white list' of warnings R CMD check can be quiet about [1]
>    - more hooks, ie I would like to call roxygen2::roxygenize() as well as
>      Rcpp::compileAttributes() when building
>    - [ This place intentionally left blank. Let me hear other proposals. ]
> We have a year to mess things up for R 3.4.0, so anybody else intereted in
> working on this?
> Dirk
> [1] There is no point in telling me that Rcpp creates a shared library of
> over 1 mb. It has been doing so for years.  C++ libraries have a footprint.

This gets tricky.  You don't want to be told that your shared lib is 
over 1 MB, but I'd imagine you'd like to know if it grew over 1000 MB. 
So really you'd like to tune that note rather than suppress it, just 
like Carlos would like a white list for the spell checker rather than 
suppressing the spell check entirely.

And CRAN has accepted Rcpp even though it generates that note, so it 
probably wouldn't object if you set the limit high enough to suppress 
the note currently, but it would object if you tried to suppress the 
note entirely (because they don't want 1000 MB shared libs either, and 
don't want to have to check your package manually).

So this would require work on CRAN's side to recognize when your 
requested suppressions are acceptable.  And I'm sure there would be 
arguments back and forth, which also suck up CRAN's time and energy.

The technical implementation is much easier than the procedural one.

Duncan Murdoch

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list