On Apr 12, 2011, at 10:33 , Joris Meys wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation, I wasn't fully aware of which optimization
> I was using. I reckon your solution is more R-sound, so no reason to
> keep with my bizarre workaround. It would be nice though if gl() got
> optimized. Thank you for the examp
Thanks for the explanation, I wasn't fully aware of which optimization
I was using. I reckon your solution is more R-sound, so no reason to
keep with my bizarre workaround. It would be nice though if gl() got
optimized. Thank you for the example too, I'm learning every day.
Cheers
Joris
On Tue, A
On Apr 11, 2011, at 23:53 , Joris Meys wrote:
> Based on a discussion on SO I ran some tests and found that converting
> to a factor is best done early in the process. Hence, I propose to
> rewrite the gl() function as :
>
> gl2 <- function(n, k, length = n * k, labels = 1:n, ordered = FALSE){
>
