You have not indicated why the subset function is insufficient for your needs...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Newmiller The ..... ..... Go Live...
DCN:<jdnew...@dcn.davis.ca.us> Basics: ##.#. ##.#. Live Go...
Live: OO#.. Dead: OO#.. Playing
Research Engineer (Solar/Batteries O.O#. #.O#. with
/Software/Embedded Controllers) .OO#. .OO#. rocks...1k
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.
Karl Brand <k.br...@erasmusmc.nl> wrote:
>Esteemed UseRs,
>
>I've got many biggish data frames which need a lot subsetting, like in
>this example:
>
># example
>eg <- data.frame(A = rnorm(10), B = rnorm(10), C = rnorm(10), D =
>rnorm(10))
>egsub <- eg[eg$A < 0 & eg$B < 1 & eg$C > 0, ]
>egsub
>egsub2 <- eg[eg$A > 1 & eg$B > 0, ]
>egsub2
>
># To make this clearer than 1000s of lines of extractions with []
># I tried to make a function like this:
>
># func(data="eg", A="< 0", B="< 1", C="> 0")
>
># Which would also need to be run as
>
># func(data="eg", A="> 1", B="> 0", C=NA)
>#end
>
>Noteably:
>-the signs* "<" and ">" need to be flexible _and_ optional
>-the quantities also need to be flexible
>-column header names i.e, A, B and C don't need flexibility,
>i.e., can remain fixed
>* "less than" and "greater than" so google picks up this thread
>
>Once again i find just how limited my grasp of R is...Is do.call() the
>best way to call binary operators like < & > in a function? Is an
>ifelse
>statement needed for each column to make filtering on it optional?
>etc....
>
>Any one with the patience to show their working version of such a
>funciton would receive my undying Rdulation. With thanks in advance,
>
>Karl
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
