Open javierluraschi opened 8 years ago
@hadley some tests are failing with the port from the original shallod_duplicate
function. Instead, seems we should look at porting a more recent version: https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/af7f52f70101960861e5d995d3a4bec010bc89e6/src/main/duplicate.c
Now... it looks like shallow_duplicate
and duplicate
are now sharing code through duplicate1
. Being that the case, we could replace the call to shallow_duplicate
with duplicate
. However, I don't fully understand what would be the side effects of using duplicate
in older versions of R that do not provide a shallow copy.
Would this be a performance downgrade? Or would this break lazyeval
.
Happy to keep this PR open but it definitely needs review from more experienced folks familiar in the r core codebase and lazyeval
.
@@ master #87 diff @@
==========================================
Files 15 15
Lines 354 367 +13
Methods 0 0
Messages 0 0
Branches 0 0
==========================================
+ Hits 348 357 +9
- Misses 6 10 +4
Partials 0 0
Powered by Codecov. Last update c155c3d...c90aa66
It's probably a minor performance regression, but it seems like it's going to be challenging to make lazyeval backward compatible with R 3.0.0.
Add support for r
3.0.0
to allow upstream packages liketibble
to support3.0.0
as well.