{Mainly to the author of the subset() function,
but RFC to all "R-develers": }
Wouldn't it be worth redefining subset.default() such
that `anything reasonable' would allow a select argument?
Currently, only subset.data.frame() allows a select argument,
and hence we can have
> (x <- c(a=1, b=3, d= 7:10))
a b d1 d2 d3 d4
1 3 7 8 9 10
> subset(as.data.frame(rbind(x)), select = -(d2:d3))
a b d1 d4
x 1 3 7 10
{and ``subset(as.data.frame(rbind(x)))'' might already be a sensible
definition for subset.default at least
if(!missing(select) && !is.null(names(x)));
and similarly for matrices.
}
---
Using ranges and "-" in indices for names instead of just integers
is a feature that I have been missing for a long time.
It would allow much more expressive code in some situations.
2nd thought:
One could even start thinking if we should n't even enhance
"[" and "[[" instead of just subset()...
I agree that one might not like things like x[- d1] that are
undefined when not part of the index, but then
"i , j" is also not really defined when not inside "[ .. ]" ...
--
[Evening musings; maybe I'm too close to dream already...]
Martin
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
subset() wish: allow "select" for non-dataframes
2 messages · Martin Maechler, Peter Dalgaard
Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch> writes:
{Mainly to the author of the subset() function,
but RFC to all "R-develers": }
Man, that was many moons ago...
Wouldn't it be worth redefining subset.default() such that `anything reasonable' would allow a select argument? Currently, only subset.data.frame() allows a select argument, and hence we can have
> (x <- c(a=1, b=3, d= 7:10))
a b d1 d2 d3 d4 1 3 7 8 9 10
> subset(as.data.frame(rbind(x)), select = -(d2:d3))
a b d1 d4
x 1 3 7 10
{and ``subset(as.data.frame(rbind(x)))'' might already be a sensible
definition for subset.default at least
if(!missing(select) && !is.null(names(x)));
and similarly for matrices.
}
This sounds doable.
2nd thought:
One could even start thinking if we should n't even enhance
"[" and "[[" instead of just subset()...
I agree that one might not like things like x[- d1] that are
undefined when not part of the index, but then
"i , j" is also not really defined when not inside "[ .. ]" ...
You do need to be careful since x[i] is ambiguous if "i" is both a
variable name in the environment and the name of an element of x. One
idea could be to allow indexing with unevaluated calls like
x[quote(-(d2:d3))] and internally have
if (is.language(ix)) {
nl<-as.list(1:dim)
names(nl)<-names(x)
ix<-eval(ix,nl)
}
(good luck with [.data.frame &friends, though...)
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3 c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._