[R-pkg-devel] Etiquette for package submissions that do not automatically pass checks?

Ivan Krylov kry|ov@r00t @end|ng |rom gm@||@com
Mon Aug 17 13:33:38 CEST 2020

Dear Cesko,

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 21:08:55 +0200
Cesko Voeten <c.c.voeten using hum.leidenuniv.nl> wrote:

> The package contains functionality to run on cluster nodes that were
> set up by the user and needs to access its own internal functions
> from there.

Apologies for derailing the thread, but I had a similar problem a few
months ago [*], found what looks like a different solution but did not
have time to investigate it further.

Given that serialize() does not send package namespaces over the wire
[**], why would it be a bad idea to pass actual functions (instead of
character strings naming functions) to parallel::parLapply and friends?
This seems to avoid the need to export the worker functions or use :::
in calls to parallel functions from package functions. Unless I am
missing something, which I probably am.

Best regards,

[*] https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-package-devel/2020q2/005468.html


"Package and namespace environments are written with pseudo-SEXPTYPEs
followed by the name."

More information about the R-package-devel mailing list