Just for completeness, all this is well documented:
CSV files:
By default there is no column name for a column of row names. If
‘col.names = NA’ and ‘row.names = TRUE’ a blank column name is
added, which is the convention used for CSV files to be read by
spreadsheets. Note
Dear Gabriel,
On 2021-07-01 6:29 p.m., Gabriel Becker wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 1:46 PM Stephen Ellison
wrote:
Please run the reproducible example provided.
When you do, you will see that write.csv writes an unnecessary empty
header field ("") over the row names column. This makes the nu
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 1:46 PM Stephen Ellison
wrote:
>
> Please run the reproducible example provided.
> When you do, you will see that write.csv writes an unnecessary empty
> header field ("") over the row names column. This makes the number of
> header fields equal to the number of columns _in
> the "unhelpful" column are the row names. They are considered an
> important part of a data frame and therefore the default (row.names =
> TRUE) is to not lose them (as there is no way back once you do). If you don't
> want to preserve the row names you can simply set row.names=FALSE.
Please run
Thanks!
So what would be the prescribed way of assigning elements to a CPLXSXP if I
needed to?
One way I see is to do what most of the code inside the interpreter does
and grab the vector's data pointer:
COMPLEX(sexp)[index] = value;
COMPLEX0(sexp)[index] = value;
This will materialize
Thanks Johannes,
I was aware of the modules package (it was not suitable for my needs
unfortunately), but I did not know about box… somehow I managed to completely
miss it in my search (embarrassing, really).
My own package offers similar functionality to box, but is designed to closely
fol
> In the end, I wrote a package that implements lightweight python-like
> modules for R and that has really improved my workflow. I hope to publish
> this package later this year after I have cleaned it up a bit.
Hi, are you aware of the previous work in this direction
https://github.com/klmr/box
Taras,
> That was my original plan as well, but managing and deploying dozens
> of little packages that are all under active development is a
> nightmare even with devtools. Just too much overhead, not to mention
> that coming up with names that would not have namespace conflicts was
> getting sill
Stephen,
I am sure one can find a lot of small issues and inconsistencies with R and
it’s standard library. It has to support a lot of legacy cruft and the design
process — especially in the early days — focused on getting things done rather
than delivering a standard library of immaculate qua
Hi Greg,
That was my original plan as well, but managing and deploying dozens of little
packages that are all under active development is a nightmare even with
devtools. Just too much overhead, not to mention that coming up with names that
would not have namespace conflicts was getting silly.
10 matches
Mail list logo