From murdoch@dunc@n @end|ng |rom gm@||@com  Sat Feb  2 15:30:49 2019
From: murdoch@dunc@n @end|ng |rom gm@||@com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 09:30:49 -0500
Subject: [Rd] Runnable R packages
In-Reply-To: <CANVKczMRW=8kHvxA3WazD_sF_hTDfhkpXxAe-QBkxos69F0VmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a8d7658b8d70467987e724724667ad19@LNXP265MB1705.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <CANVKczMRW=8kHvxA3WazD_sF_hTDfhkpXxAe-QBkxos69F0VmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <250a197e-ddb2-caac-76fc-d87aa43e01be@gmail.com>

On 02/02/2019 8:27 a.m., Barry Rowlingson wrote:
> I don't think anyone denies that you *could* make an EXE to do all
> that. The discussion is on *how easy* it should be to create a single
> file that contains an initial "main" function plus a set of bundled
> code (potentially as a package) and which when run will install its
> package code (which is contained in itself, its not in a repo),
> install dependencies, and run the main() function.
> 
> Now, I could build a self-executable shar file that bundled a package
> together with a script to do all the above. But if there was a "RUN"
> command in R, and a convention that a function called "foo::main"
> would be run by `R CMD RUN foo_1.1.1.tar.gz` then it would be so much
> easier to develop and test.

I don't believe the "so much easier" argument that this requires a 
change to base R.  If you put that functionality into a package, then 
the only extra effort the user would require is to install that other 
package.  After that, they could run

Rscript -e "yourpackage::run_main('foo_1.1.1.tar.gz')"

as I suggested before.  This is no harder than running

R CMD RUN foo_1.1.1.tar.gz

The advantage of this from R Core's perspective is that you would be 
developing and maintaining "yourpackage", you wouldn't be passing the 
burden on to them.  The advantage from your perspective is that you 
could work with whatever packages you liked.  The "remotes" package has 
almost everything you need so that "yourpackage" could be nearly 
trivial.  You wouldn't need to duplicate it within base R.

Duncan Murdoch

> 
> If people think this adds value, then if they want to offer that value
> to me as $ or ?, I'd consider writing it if their total value was more
> than my cost....
> 
> Barry
> 
> 
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:54 AM Abs Spurdle <spurdle.a at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Further to my previous post,
>> it would be possible to create an .exe file, say:
>>
>> my_r_application.exe
>>
>> That starts R, loads your R package(s), calls the R function of your choice
>> and does whatever else you want.
>>
>> However, I don't think that it would add much value.
>> But feel free to correct me if you think that I'm wrong.
>>
>>          [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



[Rd] Runnable R packages
Duncan Murdoch