Re: [Rd] Small enhancement for CMD check

From: Terry Therneau <>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:29:23 -0600

On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 16:57 +0000, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> Unfortunately it would need a major rewrite, and either piping output
> through a pager (surely the standard Unix way to handle this) or
> redirecting to a file is the simplest way to do this.
> R CMD check calls a process to run .runPackageTestsR, which calls
> further processes to run each test and diff the results. We could
> simply capture stdout/stderr of .runPackageTestsR, but then one would

> have to wait until all the tests had run before seeing any output,
> which may mean waiting hours -- that was decided to be too
> undesirable.

Fair enough. My request was of the "if it's easy to do...." class. Thanks for looking. (On Unix you could avoid the wait by using tee, BTW)
> The most prolix are
> survival portfolio matlab kappalab spatstat
> 68 36 32 30 28
> BB HSAUR2 fields pcalg aster
> 26 22 22 22 21
> The remedy seems to be to group the tests into larger units.

It appears that I'm an outlier. I certainly didn't start thinking that there would be so many tests. But whenever I track down a new bug in response to a user I'll have created some code to isolate and define the error first, and then more lines to verify the fix; I usually find the extra 15-20 minutes to 'formalize' this and add it to the test suite to be a good investment. Hopefully the 68 is taken as a measure of longivity of the package and not of bad programming skills!

Terry T mailing list Received on Mon 28 Feb 2011 - 18:37:39 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Mon 28 Feb 2011 - 21:00:24 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.

list of date sections of archive