From avraham.adler at gmail.com  Mon Oct 30 18:45:26 2017
From: avraham.adler at gmail.com (Avraham Adler)
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 13:45:26 -0400
Subject: [Rd] Debate: Shall some of Microsoft R Open Code be ported to
 mainstream R?
In-Reply-To: <CAPekMCncKgUyuRDd86ioLkABGG-fAVQZ6FyChgNrrm4orBmq4g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANNd7=mF5jQqWMYymrkx0uNQ5g6B298jj0y66is2gi6wWxUVJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=nDuTKJwKByrkQW4R7TmO=j0w5kqR867FNzU4UUbbyyKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=n9Y5UDDgA3hn+4XGT9H4Q9BwPKoht2uBnyHBme-qerLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=kuJJE3k=+_3LHAzRyiQcS0HkhiNeNam=N015o7uTgmUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=mng2CL+8XwG4Dq_r5zZT8OP5bevn=ydQFCgAM09+pDbw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=mafvMdEChnpwDYu49tcvRpSUXt79=fHroduhLB2ss1LQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=ky-7aQc-OjtPHDTPxMKxwkzyuWAGYPaVSJTsKfFg1v8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=mNYabPvvNEKEtKmhQXFV-uO-teERxLYOz1=sD=_w6epg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7==8Sgf2ueA08wpROe6CrD_n7==Gz7tSr_ncdpK3XPwoSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=ngXVKsaEwyQVmzsuVuQN5Bxcgnwmtk-EJq1ucUBt9iOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=mF44uUA8Y6VdmHV3QnYr_mJdoP2C-MY0-2nzULCSVoCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7=m4vdn1jUVPP3+a9g7cTRye_a=PrvSe43eSA_NdvuaStg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7==usdHMse-okiSLnJZ_Lj_bTSnVLWLsF5O_2-xCAfaCDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7==3TOGYzS0aYNOmeakn2woD+U+o6GfWhKy1-BuR8WfVzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANNd7==P3-yKKJUuka9+Fmajb9c7+b2X516o9hQGThyKQt0d4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPekMCncKgUyuRDd86ioLkABGG-fAVQZ6FyChgNrrm4orBmq4g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL6gwnLxhX2ojubf0S=4M3RCbrk7tRYsAk3pYkCkCGt5cUnkmw@mail.gmail.com>

[Sent offlist accidentally]

What concerns me first and foremost is that the licensure would have
to be ironclad (including for commercial use like vanilla R now) as
well as ensuring that R remains completely FLOSS. Anything ?added? to
R has to be a no-strings-attached gift to R.

Also, I would think that it would have to play nice with existing
workflows (like OpenBLAS instead of MKL) unless there is such a
benefit that it is worth breaking compatibility.

Avi

On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Kenny Bell <kmbell56 at gmail.com> wrote:
> User here: incorporating Intel's MKL, as MRO does, would be a very welcome
> addition.
>
> I was an MRO user before and it improved my experience with medium data
> immensely.
>
> They did, however, leave behind bugs here and there, especially related to
> development with Rcpp, so I switched back to vanilla R.
>
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017, 9:42 AM Juan Telleria <jtelleriar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear R Developers,
>>
>> First of all, I would like to thank you Jeroen Ooms for taking the binary
>> Window Builds from Duncan. I firmly believe that the R Community will
>> benefit a lot from his work.
>>
>> However, the debate I would like to open is about if some of Microsoft R
>> Open Code shall be ported from R Open to Mainstream R.
>>
>> There are some beneficts in R Open such as multithreaded performance:
>> https://mran.microsoft.com/documents/rro/multithread/
>>
>> Maybe, the R Consortium, and in particular, Microsoft R Team, could
>> collaborate, if appropriate, in such duty.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Juan Telleria
>>
>>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



[Rd] Debate: Shall some of Microsoft R Open Code be ported to mainstream R?
Avraham Adler