[Rcpp-devel] Matrix columns

Nick,

| Hi Dirk. Thanks for your time and trouble.
| I agree there are simpler ways to achieve this functionality, but if I don't
| get around this, I won't be able to produce the thing I'm really after.

I fear that you think that because data.frame is a preferred structure in R,
it also must be in C++. That is not the case, and the reason is the internal
representation of a data.frame at the C (and hence C++) level.  You may be
better off decomposing your data.frame into columns or different types (in R
or C++) or just use a matrix if there is a common type.
 
| > Why is retMat on the right-hand side if you try to fill it?  Makes no real
| sense.
| 
| >From rcpp-quickref:
| // Reference the second column
| // Changes propagate to xx (same applies for Row)
| NumericMatrix::Column zzcol = xx( _, 1);
| zzcol = zzcol * 2;
| 
| Only difference in my code was that I was assigning from a NumericVector
| instead of from an altered version of the original NumericMatrix::Column. Or
| am I mistaken here? I've put it here again:
| NumericVector curcol = df(i);
| NumericMatrix::Column cl = retMat( _, i);
| cl = curcol;//from rcpp-quickref, I understand this alters the matrix?

I believe you to be mistaken. Twice assigning overwrites. Feel free to debug
and test to convince yourself.
 
| Then you appear to suggest that my approach using the "dim" attribute is no
| good, or at least you get the dimensions in a very different way (by using
| the data.frame as a list). I agree your way works, but why shouldn't mine?
| In any case, this sort of thing would be a valuable addition to Rcpp in my
| opinion.
| 
| Finally, you use:
| >+        V = DF[i];
| >+        M(_,i) = V;  // one way to assign using sugar operator _
| Which makes me wonder:
| * why DF[i] and not DF(i) (what's the difference - I still have not found a
| clear explanation)

It's only stylistic. You can use either one.

| * is M(_,i) = V; any different from NumericVector cl = M(_,i);cl=V; ? If so,
| how so?

As I recall, the former ("one-step") created a compiler error as the compiler
could not disambiguate some intermediate type. The second ("two-step")
worked, so I used that,  So the difference is that one works :)   [ In
theory, both should. Patches to make the former work are welcome. ]

| * thanks for letting me know _ is part of sugar. I may be able to figure out
| its use now, but isn't this worthy of a mention in rcpp-sugar.pdf?

As I said a few days ago, patches which enhance documentation or code are
always welcome and will always be properly credited (that is, if we agree
with them and incorporate them).

Dirk

Gauss once played himself in a zero-sum game and won $50.
                      -- #11 at http://www.gaussfacts.com