Infelicity in print output with matrix indexing of `[.data.frame`
On Dec 17, 2016, at 3:15 PM, Jeff Newmiller <jdnewmil at dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote: No, cannot agree. The result of using an n by 2 matrix to index into a rectangular object is a vector. A vector can only have one storage mode for all elements. Some type coercion is necessary to accommodate this.
I have no argument with the premise that an atomic vector must be of a single mode. But the exact same values were established with a numeric vector into those positions indexed by the 2-column matrix. Why does extraction need to coerce the entire dataframe to matrix when none of the extracted values are character? I suppose my request is that the very simple line in `[.data.frame`
if (is.matrix(i))
return(as.matrix(x)[i])
If it were replaced by code that would only extract from the values needed and then use a shifted version of the selection matrix, you could get values that were not coerced by being innocent bystanders of a dataframe colum that was not relevant.
as.matrix( x[ min( i[ , 1]):max( i[ , 1]), min( i[ ,2 ]):max(i[ , 2]) ])[
cbind( i[,1]-min( i[ , 1]) +1, i[,2]- min( i[ ,2 ]) +1) ]
David. > -- > Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity. > > On December 17, 2016 2:58:24 PM PST, David Winsemius <dwinsemius at comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> On Dec 17, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Bert Gunter <bgunter.4567 at gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> It's documented, David: >>> >>> From ?"[.data.frame" >>> >>> "Matrix indexing (x[i] with a logical or a 2-column integer matrix i) >>> using [ is not recommended. For extraction, x is first coerced to a >>> matrix..." >>> >>> ergo characters for a mixed mode frame. >> >> Can we agree that it is most ironic that `[<-.data.frame` does not >> impose coercion on its `x` argument with a 2 column matrix as `i`, but >> that `[.data.frame` does? I had initially assumed that the coercion had >> occurred at the time of assignment which would have made more sense (to >> me, anyway). > David Winsemius Alameda, CA, USA