By default, `names<-` alters S4 objects
On 11-05-15 11:33 AM, John Chambers wrote:
This is basically a case of a user error that is not being caught:
Sure! https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2009-March/052386.html
On 5/14/11 3:47 PM, Herv? Pag?s wrote:
Hi, I was stumped by this. The two S4 objects below looked exactly the same:
a1
An object of class "A" Slot "aa": integer(0)
a2
An object of class "A" Slot "aa": integer(0)
str(a1)
Formal class 'A' [package ".GlobalEnv"] with 1 slots ..@ aa: int(0)
str(a2)
Formal class 'A' [package ".GlobalEnv"] with 1 slots ..@ aa: int(0) But they were not identical:
identical(a1,a2)
[1] FALSE Then I found that one had a "names" attribute but not the other:
names(attributes(a1))
[1] "aa" "class" "names"
names(attributes(a2))
[1] "aa" "class"
names(a1)
NULL
names(a2)
NULL Which explained why they were not reported as identical. After tracking the history of 'a1', I found that it was created with something like:
setClass("A", representation(aa="integer"))
[1] "A"
a1 <- new("A")
names(a1) <- "K"
names(a1)
NULL So it seems that, by default (i.e. in the absence of a specialized method), the `names<-` primitive is adding a "names" attribute to the object. Could this behaviour be modified so it doesn't alter the object?
Eh? But you did alter the object. Not only that, you altered it in what is technically an invalid way: Adding a names attribute to a class that has no names slot.
Ah, that's interesting. I didn't know I could put a names slot in my
class. Last time I tried was at least 3 years ago and that was causing
problems (don't remember the exact details) so I ended up using NAMES
instead. Trying again with R-2.14:
> setClass("A", representation(names="character"))
> a <- new("A")
> attributes(a)
$names
character(0)
$class
[1] "A"
attr(,"package")
[1] ".GlobalEnv"
> names(a)
NULL
> names(a) <- "K"
> attributes(a)
$names
[1] "K"
$class
[1] "A"
attr(,"package")
[1] ".GlobalEnv"
> names(a)
NULL
Surprise! But that's another story...
The modification that would make sense would be to give you an error in the above code. Not a bad idea, but it's likely to generate more complaints in other contexts, particularly where people don't distinguish the "list" class from lists with names (the "namedList" class). A plausible strategy: 1. If the class has a vector data slot and no names slot, assign the names but with a warning. 2. Otherwise, throw an error. (I.e., I would prefer an error throughout, but discretion ....)
Or, at a minimum (if no consensus can be reached about the above strategy), not add a "names" attribute set to NULL. My original post was more about keeping the internal representation of objects "normalized", in general, so identical() is more likely to be meaningful. Thanks, H.
Comments? John
Thanks, H.
______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Herv? Pag?s Program in Computational Biology Division of Public Health Sciences Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Ave. N, M1-B514 P.O. Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024 E-mail: hpages at fhcrc.org Phone: (206) 667-5791 Fax: (206) 667-1319