Hi R-developers
In the package Parallel, the function parLapply(cl, x, f) seems to allow
transmission of only one parameter (x) to the function f. Hence in order to
compute f(x, y) parallelly, I had to define f(x, y) as f(x) and tried to
access y within the function, whereas y was defined outside
This works:
clusterExport(cl, c("f","y"), envir=environment())
r <- parLapply(cl, x, function(x) f(x,y))
You need to export your function (“f”) and additional variables (“y”), and then
define that function inside parLapply ("f(x,y)”). If you were to also make use
of
additional libraries (or sou
You can put the function of interest and any global
variables it needs into a private environment, which gets sent
along with the function to the child processes. E.g.
library(parallel)
cl3 <- makeCluster(3)
y <- c(1,100,1)
addY <- function(x) x + y
withGlobals <- function(FUN, ...){
envi
I came across the distinction between the name of an object and the name of the
class that it belongs to in an oblique way again today, which made me question
my acceptance that it would be natural for them to differ.
I asked a question on SO here:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20762559/
Fg,
This is not really an r-devel question. It is more appropriate for r-help
as far as I know. Please ask questions like it there in the future.
Anyway, my understanding is that the type of an object has to do with how
it is stored internally, whereas the class has to do with how it is
dispatche
Gabriel,
[I understand that this is not about R development, but it seemed that this was
a question about R internals that would be better answered on the R-devel list.]
Thanks for your answer. Yes, this is what the person who answered on SO said as
well.
But my question is about terminolog
It sounds like you're attempting to apply a version of object orientation
(objects being instances of classes) which does not apply to R (in the S3
world anyway).
That simply isn't how S3 classes work (in many ways S3 classes aren't
really "classes" at all in the way you seem to be using the word,
Gabriel,
Thanks. Not trying to influence any changes, just trying to understand better
what is going on when the term "object type" is used. From what you and the SO
answer seem to suggest, it has little to do with OOP/classes at all. This would
be fine if John Chambers weren't explicitly jux
[Resending because HTML was scrubbed.]
Gabriel,
Thanks. Not trying to influence any changes, just trying to understand better
what is going on when the term "object type" is used. From what you and the SO
answer seem to suggest, it has little to do with OOP/classes at all. This would
be fi
