The first two behave as expected for vectors, because they are both
(at least implicitly) vectors in that usage. But a data.frame is a
tabular structure, so it's not obvious how to recycle it, nor does an
implicit coercion to matrix/vector seem justified. Thus, R attempts to
"recycle" the vector to
Can anyone explain me the following behavior:
> 1:2/1
[1] 1 2
-- makes sense
> 1:2/matrix(1,1,1)
[1] 1 2
-- makes sense
> 1:2/data.frame(a=1)
a
1 1
-- why is this different?
Best,
Ott
--
Ott Toomet
Visiting Researcher
School of Information
Mary Gates Hall, Suite 095
University of Washin
So I'm working on a custom front end to R, in one mode of the front
end I dynamically load libR.so into a child worker thread. I'm very
careful to make sure it is loaded by a single thread and loaded only
once, but since it is a child thread it violates assumptions made by
the stack size checking i
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Barry Rowlingson <
b.rowling...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Nathan Esau wrote:
> > I was wondering why the decision was made long ago to never implement
> > multi-line comments in R. I feel there are several argument to be made
> for
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Nathan Esau wrote:
> I was wondering why the decision was made long ago to never implement
> multi-line comments in R. I feel there are several argument to be made for
> why the R language should have multi-line comments.
>
> 1. Many programming languages (includin
