FAQ

Below are some Frequently Asked Questions about cpp11. If you have a question that you think would fit well here please open an issue.

1. What are the underlying types of cpp11 objects?

vector	element
cpp11::integers	int
cpp11::doubles	double
cpp11::logicals	cpp11::r_bool
cpp11::strings	cpp11::r_string
cpp11::raws	uint8_t
cpp11::list	SEXP

2. How do I add elements to a named list?

Use the push_back() method with the named literal syntax. The named literal syntax is defined in the cpp11::literals namespace.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::list foo_push() {
  using namespace cpp11::literals;

  cpp11::writable::list x;
  x.push_back({"foo"_nm = 1});

  return x;
}

3. Does cpp11 support default arguments?

cpp11 does not support default arguments, while convenient they would require more complexity to support than is currently worthwhile. If you need default argument support you can use a wrapper function around your cpp11 registered function. A common convention is to name the internal function with a trailing _.

#include <cpp11.hpp>
[[cpp11::register]]
double add_some_(double x, double amount) {
  return x + amount;
}

add_some <- function(x, amount = 1) {
  add_some_(x, amount)
}
add_some(1)
#> [1] 2
add_some(1, amount = 5)
#> [1] 6

4. How do I create a new empty list?

Define a new writable list object.

cpp11::writable::list x;

5. How do I retrieve (named) elements from a named vector/list?

Use the [] accessor function.

x["foo"]

6. How can I tell whether a vector is named?

Use the named() method for vector classes.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
bool is_named(cpp11::strings x) {
  return x.named();
}

is_named("foo")
#> [1] FALSE

is_named(c(x = "foo"))
#> [1] TRUE

7. How do I return a `cpp11::writable::logicals` object with only a `FALSE` value?

You need to use list initialization with {} to create the object.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::writable::logicals my_false() {
  return {FALSE};
}

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::writable::logicals my_true() {
  return {TRUE};
}

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::writable::logicals my_both() {
  return {TRUE, FALSE, TRUE};
}

my_false()
#> [1] FALSE

my_true()
#> [1] TRUE

my_both()
#> [1]  TRUE FALSE  TRUE

8. How do I create a new empty environment?

To do this you need to call the base::new.env() function from C++. This can be done by creating a cpp11::function object and then calling it to generate the new environment.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::environment create_environment() {
  cpp11::function new_env(cpp11::package("base")["new.env"]);
  return new_env();
}

9. How do I assign and retrieve values in an environment? What happens if I try to get a value that doesn’t exist?

Use [] to retrieve or assign values from an environment by name. If a value does not exist it will return R_UnboundValue.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
bool foo_exists(cpp11::environment x) {
  return x["foo"] != R_UnboundValue;
}

[[cpp11::register]]
void set_foo(cpp11::environment x, double value) {
  x["foo"] = value;
}

x <- new.env()

foo_exists(x)
#> [1] FALSE

set_foo(x, 1)

foo_exists(x)
#> [1] TRUE

10. How can I create a `cpp11:raws` from a `std::string`?

There is no built in way to do this. One method would be to push_back() each element of the string individually.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::raws push_raws() {
  std::string x("hi");
  cpp11::writable::raws out;

  for (auto c : x) {
    out.push_back(c);
  }

  return out;
}

push_raws()
#> [1] 68 69

11. How can I create a `std::string` from a `cpp11::writable::string`?

Because C++ does not allow for two implicit cast, explicitly cast to cpp11::r_string first.

#include <cpp11.hpp>
#include <string>

[[cpp11::register]]
std::string my_string() {
  cpp11::writable::strings x({"foo", "bar"});
  std::string elt = cpp11::r_string(x[0]);
  return elt;
}

12. What are the types for C++ iterators?

The iterators are ::iterator classes contained inside the vector classes. For example the iterator for cpp11::doubles would be cpp11::doubles::iterator and the iterator for cpp11::writable::doubles would be cpp11::writable::doubles::iterator.

13. My code has `using namespace std`, why do I still have to include `std::` in the signatures of `[[cpp11::register]]` functions?

The using namespace std directive will not be included in the generated code of the function signatures, so they still need to be fully qualified. However you will not need to qualify the type names within those functions.

The following won’t compile

#include <cpp11.hpp>
#include <string>

using namespace std;

[[cpp11::register]]
string foobar() {
  return string("foo") + "-bar";
}

But this will compile and work as intended

#include <cpp11.hpp>
#include <string>

using namespace std;

[[cpp11::register]]
std::string foobar() {
  return string("foo") + "-bar";
}

14. How do I modify a vector in place?

In place modification breaks the normal semantics of R code. In general it should be avoided, which is why cpp11::writable classes always copy their data when constructed.

However if you are positive in-place modification is necessary for your use case you can use the move constructor to do this.

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
void add_one(cpp11::sexp x_sexp) {
  cpp11::writable::integers x(std::move(x_sexp.data()));
  for (auto&& value : x) {
    ++value;
  }
}

x <- c(1L, 2L, 3L, 4L)
.Internal(inspect(x))
#> @12034dfc8 13 INTSXP g0c2 [REF(2)] (len=4, tl=0) 1,2,3,4
add_one(x)
.Internal(inspect(x))
#> @12034dfc8 13 INTSXP g0c2 [REF(6)] (len=4, tl=0) 2,3,4,5
x
#> [1] 2 3 4 5

15. Should I call `cpp11::unwind_protect()` manually?

cpp11::unwind_protect() is cpp11’s way of safely calling R’s C API. In short, it allows you to run a function that might throw an R error, catch the longjmp() of that error, promote it to an exception that is thrown and caught by a try/catch that cpp11 sets up for you at .Call() time (which allows destructors to run), and finally tells R to continue unwinding the stack now that the C++ objects have had a chance to destruct as needed.

Since cpp11::unwind_protect() takes an arbitrary function, you may be wondering if you should use it for your own custom needs. In general, we advise against this because this is an extremely advanced feature that is prone to subtle and hard to debug issues.

Destructors

The following setup for test_destructor_ok() with a manual call to unwind_protect() would work:

#include <cpp11.hpp>

class A {
 public:
  ~A();
};

A::~A() {
  Rprintf("hi from the destructor!");
}

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_destructor_ok() {
  A a{};
  cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
    Rf_error("oh no!");  
  });
}

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_destructor_bad() {
  cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
    A a{};
    Rf_error("oh no!");  
  });
}

test_destructor_ok()
#> Error: oh no!
#> hi from the destructor!

But if you happen to move a into the unwind_protect(), then it won’t be destructed, and you’ll end up with a memory leak at best, and a much more sinister issue if your destructor is important:

test_destructor_bad()
#> Error: oh no!

In general, the only code that can be called within unwind_protect() is “pure” C code or C++ code that only uses POD (plain-old-data) types and no exceptions. If you mix complex C++ objects with R’s C API within unwind_protect(), then any R errors will result in a jump that prevents your destructors from running.

Nested `unwind_protect()`

Another issue that can arise has to do with nested calls to unwind_protect(). It is very hard (if not impossible) to end up with invalidly nested unwind_protect() calls when using the typical cpp11 API, but you can manually create a scenario like the following:

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_nested() {
  cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
    cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
      Rf_error("oh no!");  
    });
  });
}

If you were to run test_nested() from R, it would likely crash or hang your R session due to the following chain of events:

test_nested() sets up a try/catch to catch unwind exceptions
The outer unwind_protect() is called. It uses the C function R_UnwindProtect() to call its lambda function.
The inner unwind_protect() is called. It again uses R_UnwindProtect(), this time to call Rf_error().
Rf_error() performs a longjmp() which is caught by the inner unwind_protect() and promoted to an exception.
That exception is thrown, but because we are in the outer call to R_UnwindProtect() (a C function), we end up throwing that exception across C stack frames. This is undefined behavior, which is known to have caused R to crash on certain platforms.

You might think that you’d never do this, but the same scenario can also occur with a combination of 1 call to unwind_protect() combined with usage of the cpp11 API:

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_hidden_nested() {
  cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
    cpp11::stop("oh no!");
  });
}

Because cpp11::stop() (and most of the cpp11 API) uses unwind_protect() internally, we’ve indirectly ended up in a nested unwind_protect() scenario again.

In general, if you must use unwind_protect() then you must be very careful not to use any of the cpp11 API inside of the unwind_protect() call.

It is worth pointing out that calling out to an R function from cpp11 which then calls back into cpp11 is still safe, i.e. if the registered version of the imaginary test_outer() function below was called from R, then that would work:

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_inner() {
  cpp11::stop("oh no!")
}

[[cpp11::register]]
void test_outer() {
  auto fn = cpp11::package("mypackage")["test_inner"]
  fn();
}

This might seem unsafe because cpp11::package() uses unwind_protect() to call the R function for test_inner(), which then goes back into C++ to call cpp11::stop(), which itself uses unwind_protect(), so it seems like we are in a nested scenario, but this scenario does actually work. It makes more sense if we analyze it one step at a time:

Call the R function for test_outer()
A try/catch is set up to catch unwind exceptions
The C++ function for test_outer() is called
cpp11::package() uses unwind_protect() to call the R function for test_inner()
Call the R function for test_inner()
A try/catch is set up to catch unwind exceptions (this is the key!)
The C++ function for test_inner() is called
cpp11::stop("oh no!") is called, which uses unwind_protect() to call Rf_error(), causing a longjmp(), which is caught by that unwind_protect() and promoted to an exception.
That exception is thrown, but this time it is caught by the try/catch set up by test_inner() as we entered it from the R side. This prevents that exception from crossing the C++ -> C boundary.
The try/catch calls R_ContinueUnwind(), which longjmp()s again, and now the unwind_protect() set up by cpp11::package() catches that, and promotes it to an exception.
That exception is thrown and caught by the try/catch set up by test_outer().
The try/catch calls R_ContinueUnwind(), which longjmp()s again, and at this point we can safely let the longjmp() proceed to force an R error.

16. Ok but I really want to call `cpp11::unwind_protect()` manually

If you’ve read the above bullet and still feel like you need to call unwind_protect(), then you should keep in mind the following when writing the function to unwind-protect:

You shouldn’t create any C++ objects that have destructors.
You shouldn’t use any parts of the cpp11 API that may call unwind_protect().
You must be very careful not to call unwind_protect() in a nested manner.

In other words, if you only use plain-old-data types, are careful to never throw exceptions, and only use R’s C API, then you can use unwind_protect().

One place you may want to do this is when working with long character vectors. Unfortunately, due to the way cpp11 must protect the individual CHARSXP objects that make up a character vector, it can currently be quite slow to use the cpp11 API for this. Consider this example of extracting out individual elements with x[i] vs using the native R API:

#include <cpp11.hpp>

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::sexp test_extract_cpp11(cpp11::strings x) {
  const R_xlen_t size = x.size();

  for (R_xlen_t i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
    (void) x[i];
  }
  
  return R_NilValue;
}

[[cpp11::register]]
cpp11::sexp test_extract_r_api(cpp11::strings x) {
  const R_xlen_t size = x.size();
  const SEXP data{x};

  cpp11::unwind_protect([&] {
    for (R_xlen_t i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
      (void) STRING_ELT(data, i);
    }
  });
  
  return R_NilValue;
}

set.seed(123)
x <- sample(letters, 1e6, replace = TRUE)

bench::mark(
  test_extract_cpp11(x), 
  test_extract_r_api(x)
)
#> Warning: Some expressions had a GC in every iteration; so filtering is
#> disabled.
#> # A tibble: 2 × 6
#>   expression                 min   median `itr/sec` mem_alloc `gc/sec`
#>   <bch:expr>            <bch:tm> <bch:tm>     <dbl> <bch:byt>    <dbl>
#> 1 test_extract_cpp11(x)  23.28ms  24.77ms      38.9        0B     66.1
#> 2 test_extract_r_api(x)   1.12ms   1.15ms     863.         0B      0

We plan to improve on this in the future, but for now this is one of the only places where we feel it is reasonable to call unwind_protect() manually.

FAQ