inst/doc/converting.Rmd

---
title: "Converting from Rcpp"
output: rmarkdown::html_vignette
vignette: >
  %\VignetteIndexEntry{Converting from Rcpp}
  %\VignetteEngine{knitr::rmarkdown}
  %\VignetteEncoding{UTF-8}
---

```{r, include = FALSE}
knitr::opts_chunk$set(
  collapse = TRUE,
  comment = "#>"
)

should_run_benchmarks <- function(x) {
  get("requireNamespace")("cpp11test", quietly = TRUE) && asNamespace("cpp11test")$should_run_benchmarks()
}
```

In many cases there is no need to convert a package from Rcpp.
If the code is already written and you don't have a very compelling need to use cpp11 I would recommend you continue to use Rcpp.
However if you _do_ feel like your project will benefit from using cpp11 this vignette will provide some guidance and doing the conversion.

It is also a place to highlight some of the largest differences between Rcpp and cpp11.

## Class comparison table

| Rcpp                    | cpp11 (read-only)     | cpp11 (writable)   | cpp11 header                 |
| ---                     | ---                   | ---                | ---                          |
| NumericVector           | doubles               | writable::doubles  | <cpp11/doubles.hpp>          |
| IntegerVector           | integers              | writable::integers | <cpp11/integers.hpp>         |
| CharacterVector         | strings               | writable::strings  | <cpp11/strings.hpp>          |
| RawVector               | raws                  | writable::raws     | <cpp11/raws.hpp>             |
| List                    | list                  | writable::list     | <cpp11/list.hpp>             |
| RObject                 | sexp                  |                    | <cpp11/sexp.hpp>             |
| XPtr                    |                       | external_pointer   | <cpp11/external_pointer.hpp> |
| Environment             |                       | environment        | <cpp11/environment.hpp>      |
| Function                |                       | function           | <cpp11/function.hpp>         |
| Environment (namespace) |                       | package            | <cpp11/function.hpp>         |
| wrap                    |                       | as_sexp            | <cpp11/as.hpp>               |
| as                      |                       | as_cpp             | <cpp11/as.hpp>               |
| stop                    | stop                  |                    | <cpp11/protect.hpp>          |
| checkUserInterrupt      | check_user_interrupt  |                    | <cpp11/protect.hpp>          |

## Incomplete list of Rcpp features not included in cpp11

- None of [Modules](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Rcpp/vignettes/Rcpp-modules.pdf)
- None of [Sugar](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Rcpp/vignettes/Rcpp-sugar.pdf)
- Some parts of [Attributes](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Rcpp/vignettes/Rcpp-attributes.pdf)
  - No dependencies
  - No random number generator restoration
  - No support for roxygen2 comments
  - No interfaces

## Read-only vs writable vectors

The largest difference between cpp11 and Rcpp classes is that Rcpp classes modify their data in place, whereas cpp11 classes require copying the data to a writable class for modification.

The default classes, e.g. `cpp11::doubles` are *read-only* classes that do not permit modification.
If you want to modify the data you need to use the classes in the `cpp11::writable` namespace, e.g. `cpp11::writable::doubles`.

In addition use the `writable` variants if you need to create a new R vector entirely in C++.

## Fewer implicit conversions

Rcpp also allows very flexible implicit conversions, e.g. if you pass a `REALSXP` to a function that takes a `Rcpp::IntegerVector()` it is implicitly converted to a `INTSXP`.
These conversions are nice for usability, but require (implicit) duplication of the data, with the associated runtime costs.

cpp11 throws an error in these cases. If you want the implicit coercions you can add a call to `as.integer()` or `as.double()` as appropriate from R when you call the function.

## Calling R functions from C++

Calling R functions from C++ is similar to using Rcpp.

```c++
Rcpp::Function as_tibble("as_tibble", Rcpp::Environment::namespace_env("tibble"));
as_tibble(x, Rcpp::Named(".rows", num_rows), Rcpp::Named(".name_repair", name_repair));
```

```c++
using namespace cpp11::literals; // so we can use ""_nm syntax

auto as_tibble = cpp11::package("tibble")["as_tibble"];
as_tibble(x, ".rows"_nm = num_rows, ".name_repair"_nm = name_repair);
```


## Appending behavior

One major difference in Rcpp and cpp11 is how vectors are grown.
Rcpp vectors have a `push_back()` method, but unlike `std::vector()` no additional space is reserved when pushing.
This makes calling `push_back()` repeatably very expensive, as the entire vector has to be copied each call.

In contrast `cpp11` vectors grow efficiently, reserving extra space.
Because of this you can do ~10,000,000 vector appends with cpp11 in approximately the same amount of time that Rcpp does 10,000, as this benchmark demonstrates.

```{r, message = FALSE, eval = should_run_benchmarks()}
library(cpp11test)
grid <- expand.grid(len = 10 ^ (0:7), pkg = "cpp11", stringsAsFactors = FALSE)
grid <- rbind(
  grid,
  expand.grid(len = 10 ^ (0:4), pkg = "rcpp", stringsAsFactors = FALSE)
)
b_grow <- bench::press(.grid = grid,
  {
    fun = match.fun(sprintf("%sgrow_", ifelse(pkg == "cpp11", "", paste0(pkg, "_"))))
    bench::mark(
      fun(len)
    )
  }
)[c("len", "pkg", "min", "mem_alloc", "n_itr", "n_gc")]
saveRDS(b_grow, "growth.Rds", version = 2)
```

```{r, echo = FALSE, dev = "svg", fig.ext = "svg", eval = capabilities("cairo")}
b_grow <- readRDS("growth.Rds")
library(ggplot2)
ggplot(b_grow, aes(x = len, y = min, color = pkg)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  bench::scale_y_bench_time() +
  scale_x_log10(
    breaks = scales::trans_breaks("log10", function(x) 10^x),
    labels = scales::trans_format("log10", scales::math_format(10^.x))
  ) +
  coord_fixed() +
  theme(panel.grid.minor = element_blank()) +
  labs(title = "log-log plot of vector size vs construction time", x = NULL, y = NULL)
```

```{r, echo = FALSE}
knitr::kable(b_grow)
```

## Random Number behavior

Rcpp unconditionally includes calls to `GetRNGstate()` and `PutRNGstate()` before each wrapped function.
This ensures that if any C++ code calls the R API functions `unif_rand()`, `norm_rand()`, `exp_rand()` or `R_unif_index()` the random seed state is set accordingly.
cpp11 does _not_ do this, so you must include the calls to `GetRNGstate()` and `PutRNGstate()` _yourself_ if you use any of those functions in your C++ code.
See [R-exts 6.3 - Random number generation](https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-exts.html#Random-numbers) for details on these functions.

One convenient way to do safely is to use a simple class:

```cpp
class local_rng {
public:
  local_rng() {
    GetRNGstate();
  }

  ~local_rng(){
    PutRNGstate();
  }
};

void foo() {
  local_rng rng_state;
  /* my code using the RNG */
}
```

## Mechanics of converting a package from Rcpp

1. Add cpp11 to `LinkingTo`
1. Add C++11 to `SystemRequirements`
1. Convert all instances of `// [[Rcpp::export]]` to `[[cpp11::register]]`
1. Clean and recompile the package, e.g. `pkgbuild::clean_dll()` `pkgload::load_all()`
1. Run tests `devtools::test()`
1. Start converting function by function
   - Remember you can usually inter-convert between cpp11 and Rcpp classes by going through `SEXP` if needed.
   - Converting the code a bit at a time (and regularly running your tests) is the best way to do the conversion correctly and make progress
   - Doing a separate commit after converting each file (or possibly each function) can make finding any regressions with [git bisect](https://youtu.be/KKeucpfAuuA) much easier in the future.

## Common issues when converting

### STL includes

Rcpp.h includes a number of STL headers automatically, notably `<string>` and `<vector>`, however the cpp11 headers generally do not. If you have errors like

> error: no type named 'string' in namespace 'std'

You will need to include the appropriate STL header, in this case `<string>`.

### R API includes

cpp11 conflicts with macros declared by some R headers unless the macros `R_NO_REMAP` and `STRICT_R_HEADERS` are defined.
If you include `cpp11/R.hpp` before any R headers these macros will be defined appropriately, otherwise you may see errors like

> R headers were included before cpp11 headers and at least one of R_NO_REMAP or STRICT_R_HEADERS was not defined.

Which indicate that you must either change your include order or add preprocessor definitions for `R_NO_REMAP` and `STRICT_R_HEADERS`.
Note that transitive includes of R headers (for example, those included by `Rcpp.h`) can also introduce the conflicting macros.

### Type aliases

If you use typedefs for cpp11 types or define custom types you will need to define them in a `pkgname_types.hpp` file so that `cpp_register()` can include it in the generated code.

### `cpp11::stop()` and `cpp11::warning()` with `std::string`

`cpp11::stop()` and `cpp11::warning()` are thin wrappers around `Rf_stop()` and `Rf_warning()`.
These are simple C functions with a `printf()` API, so do not understand C++ objects like `std::string`.
Therefore you need to call `obj.c_str()` when passing character data to them.

### Logical vector construction

If you are constructing a length 1 logical vector you may need to explicitly use a `r_bool()` object in the initializer list rather than `TRUE`, `FALSE` or `NA_INTEGER`.
This issue only occurs with the clang compiler, not gcc.
When constructing vectors with more than one element this is not an issue

```cpp
// bad
cpp11::writable::logicals({FALSE});

// good
cpp11::writable::logicals({r_bool(FALSE)});

// good
cpp11::writable::logicals({FALSE, NA_LOGICAL});
```