Make one more AnnoyIndex use be Annoy::AnnoyIndex

[eddelbuettel]

Truly sorry this got missed last time. With this change it builds for me under the new (ie "CRAN candidate") version, and at CI under the old (ie "current CRAN release") version.

[jlmelville]

Thanks @eddelbuettel I'll make another release and hope the CRAN gods are in a good mood...

[eddelbuettel]

Thanks for the second prompt update (even while CRAN was partially close for a day (?) as it seemed)!

I will attempt another round with RcppAnnoy in a day or two, currently watching over digest where I inadvertently created a bad ("cannot install") bug for M1/M2/Arm64 folks. Should be done soon.

[jlmelville]

Thank you for keeping RcppAnnoy going @eddelbuettel. Just to check: is there a need for another quick release of uwot once RcppAnnoy is updated or can I give the CRAN maintainers a break for a bit? Everything should just tick along with the #ifdefs in place for now regardless of which version of RcppAnnoy users will be running, correct? Or would you prefer I do a new release and update the DESCRIPTION to specify a new minimum version of RcppAnnoy?

[eddelbuettel]

That's the plan -- a smooth upgrade of RcppAnnoy to a new version which, now that uwot is prepared will not have it fail.

In due course, you could indeed remove the #ifdef that I added and just depend with >= on this upcoming RcppAnnoy version 0.0.21.

There is one other possible issue. The Seurat package had some unit test fail. In going with the updated Annoy, and with C++17, I also went with multithreaded indexing. This may change 'reference' results as the multhithreaded RNG stream is different so Annoy will possibly identify alternate 'approximate' points (that should of course be equivalent, but not identical). So I am pondering not turning that on now but maybe leave it for later.

With that the only change really is the namespace addition in Annoy for which we prepared uwot.

[eddelbuettel]

Or would you prefer

I forget to answer this. I actually "also do not know". On the one hand what we have now is more universal and allows any and all RcppAnnoy versions be use, on the other trimming the #ifdef away is more concise. I think I do both in different repos --- really your call and there is no 'one best way' I think.

[eddelbuettel]

Now on CRAN -- thanks again for your help.