For intersecting two polygon layers, is there any advantage of using gIntersection (from the rgeos package) instead of intersect (from the raster package)? After a few tests, it appears that intersect is a little bit faster. Moreover, intersect automatically calculates the associated dataframe, while gIntersection leaves the user making it. Thanks for your awer(s). Jean-Luc
gIntersection versus intersect
2 messages · Jean-Luc Dupouey, Robert J. Hijmans
Jean-Luc. It is as you say, intersect returns Spatial*DataFrame objects whereas gIntersect does not the DataFrame bits. This pattern is also true for raster functions aggregate, union, erase, cover and crop (see section XIV in ?'raster-package') which all have their analogues in rgeos that they build on. intersect uses gIntersection so it should not be faster. Robert
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Jean-Luc Dupouey <dupouey at nancy.inra.fr> wrote:
For intersecting two polygon layers, is there any advantage of using gIntersection (from the rgeos package) instead of intersect (from the raster package)? After a few tests, it appears that intersect is a little bit faster. Moreover, intersect automatically calculates the associated dataframe, while gIntersection leaves the user making it. Thanks for your awer(s). Jean-Luc
_______________________________________________ R-sig-Geo mailing list R-sig-Geo at r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo