@JagersbergKnut Well, Rfast's core is quite huge using a lot of C++. C++ need compile and optimisation. I could reduce the time but would be unreadable for us. To tell the truth, I have already reduce 50% the compilation time. That is why Rfast2 exists.
@Guru_GyanKhoji@evalparse No! This is wrong. It is proved that optimized C++ is quite faster than C. CRAN compile C languages with o2 flag. The best is o3. You can change it by you self and compile Rfast again locally. It is always the algorithm.
Dear Editor,
Itโs ok that you decided to desk-reject our paper with 3 pre-regโed studies incl. a non-WEIRD sample because some of our pre-regโed hypotheses were not confirmed! BUT, while I appreciate recommending alternative outlets, this condescending note was unnecessary:
@ten_photos There is no difference! Unfortunately we reached the compilation limit of CRAN and we could add new functions so we create a new package. Thanks for your support!