I am probably mistaken but it looks to me like the design of much of the
data.frame infrastructure not only does not insist you give columns names, but
even has all kinds of options such as check.names and fix.empty.names
https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.6.2/topics/data.fr
Dear All,
Currently, list= in base::replace(x, list, value) has to be an index
vector. For me, at least, the most common use case is for list= to be
some simple property of elements of x, e.g.,
x <- c(1,2,NA,3)
replace(x, is.na(x), 0)
Particularly when using R pipes, which don't allow multiple
s
For what it's worth I think the increased emphasis on classed
errors should help with this (i.e., it will be easier to filter out
errors you know are false positives/irrelevant for your use case).
On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 12:17 PM Antoine Fabri wrote:
>
> Let me expand a bit, I might have expres
Let me expand a bit, I might have expressed myself poorly.
If there is a good reason for a warning I want a warning, and because I
take them seriously I don't want my console cluttered with those that can
be avoided. I strongly believe we should strive to make our code silent,
and I like my conso
> peter dalgaard
> on Thu, 2 Mar 2023 19:47:59 +0100 writes:
> I believe the wording goes back to Martin Maechler many
> moons ago (AFAICT towards the end of the last millennium.)
> We might leave it to him to change it?
> - Peter D.
Thank you, Peter.
Yes, this is *v
> Gabriel Becker
> on Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:37:18 -0800 writes:
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 2:02 PM Antoine Fabri
> wrote:
>> Thanks and good point about unspecified behavior. The way
>> it behaves now (when it doesn't ignore) is more
>> consistent with data.frame() th
