hello Hadley
thanks for this...
> There are the flip operators of matlab, and rotating matrices/array by
> multiples of 90 degrees.
>
arot() in the magic package does this (which is an operation
frequently encountered in magic hypercubes)
>> I'm always on the lookout for other array functiona
> well put! I would add, though, that t() generalizes to aperm(),
> and the magic package contains arev() which is a generalization
> of rev().
There are the flip operators of matlab, and rotating matrices/array by
multiples of 90 degrees.
> I'm always on the lookout for other array functional
hello folks
[snip]
> but it is frustrating when base
> functionality only works with vectors, not matrices, or arrays. It
> would be more compelling if (e.g.) t and rev also had dimension
> arguments.
>
> Hadley
>
> --
well put! I would add, though, that t() generalizes to aperm(),
and the magi
> I don't see the benefit of seq_along(mtcars, 1) versus seq_len(nrow(df)) in
> readability.
I like it because:
* it reads nicely: I want a sequence along this structure in that direction
* it's more consistent: for(i in seq_along(x)) -> for(row in
seq_along(mtcars, 1))
* it generalised in a stra
On 12-01-06 1:31 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
Hi all,
A couple of ideas for improving seq_along:
* It would be really useful to have a second argument dim:
seq_along(mtcars, 1)
seq_along(mtcars, 2)
# equivalent to
seq_len(dim(mtcars)[1])
seq_len(dim(mtcars)[2])
I ofte
