On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Nathan Esau wrote:
> I was wondering why the decision was made long ago to never implement
> multi-line comments in R. I feel there are several argument to be made for
> why the R language should have multi-line comments.
>
> 1. Many programming languages (includin
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Barry Rowlingson <
b.rowling...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Nathan Esau wrote:
> > I was wondering why the decision was made long ago to never implement
> > multi-line comments in R. I feel there are several argument to be made
> for
So I'm working on a custom front end to R, in one mode of the front
end I dynamically load libR.so into a child worker thread. I'm very
careful to make sure it is loaded by a single thread and loaded only
once, but since it is a child thread it violates assumptions made by
the stack size checking i
Can anyone explain me the following behavior:
> 1:2/1
[1] 1 2
-- makes sense
> 1:2/matrix(1,1,1)
[1] 1 2
-- makes sense
> 1:2/data.frame(a=1)
a
1 1
-- why is this different?
Best,
Ott
--
Ott Toomet
Visiting Researcher
School of Information
Mary Gates Hall, Suite 095
University of Washin
The first two behave as expected for vectors, because they are both
(at least implicitly) vectors in that usage. But a data.frame is a
tabular structure, so it's not obvious how to recycle it, nor does an
implicit coercion to matrix/vector seem justified. Thus, R attempts to
"recycle" the vector to
