I sent this to Iñaki personally by mistake. Thank you for notifying me.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:53 PM Iñaki Úcar wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, I always thought about factors as fundamentally
> characters, but with restrictions: a subspace of all possible strings.
> And I'd say that a non-ne
Dear all,
I just have identified the following issue which I believe could be a bug in R:
Let me illustrate:
First, enable the display of fractional seconds and check that it works:
> options(digits.secs = 6, digits = 6)
> as.character(as.POSIXct("2018-08-31 14:15:16.123456"))
[1] "2018-08-31 14
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:57 AM Joris Meys wrote:
>
> I sent this to Iñaki personally by mistake. Thank you for notifying me.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:53 PM Iñaki Úcar wrote:
>
> >
> > For what it's worth, I always thought about factors as fundamentally
> > characters, but with restrictions:
On 8 August 2018 at 12:40, Hadley Wickham wrote:
| I think this is true in the tidyverse, which will never give you a
| factor unless you explicitly ask for one, but the default in base R
| (at least as soon as a data frame is involved) is to turn character
| vectors into factors.
False. Base R
Hi Hadley,
my point actually came from a data analyst point of view. A character
variable is something used for extra information, eg the "any other ideas?"
field of a questionnaire. A categorical variable is a variable describing
categories defined by the researcher. If it is made clear that a fa
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:54 AM Joris Meys wrote:
>
> Hi Hadley,
>
> my point actually came from a data analyst point of view. A character
> variable is something used for extra information, eg the "any other ideas?"
> field of a questionnaire. A categorical variable is a variable describing
> c
> > As Gabe mentioned (and you've explained about) the term "type"
> > is really confusing here. As you know, the R internals are all
> > about SEXPs, TYPEOF(), etc, and that's what the R level
> > typeof(.) also returns. As you want to use something slightly
> > different, it should be different
R's dyn.unload() will unconditionally unload the given shared object; it
does not check whether there is any object (external pointer or weak
reference) with a C finalizer pointing into the space of the shared
object being unloaded. So it is expected that R will segfault later when
such fina
On 9 August 2018 at 20:37, Tomas Kalibera wrote:
| So to answer your original question, this could probably be handled in
| Rcpp,
Hm. Why do you say that / what did you have in mind?
Recall that we do not alter SEXPs or introduce additional additional
reference counters -- because we do not th
On 9.8.2018 20:58, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 9 August 2018 at 20:37, Tomas Kalibera wrote:
| So to answer your original question, this could probably be handled in
| Rcpp,
Hm. Why do you say that / what did you have in mind?
Recall that we do not alter SEXPs or introduce additional additio
On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 9 August 2018 at 20:37, Tomas Kalibera wrote:
| So to answer your original question, this could probably be handled in
| Rcpp,
Hm. Why do you say that / what did you have in mind?
We say it because it is true. Rcpp registers C finalizers and ru
On 9 August 2018 at 14:13, luke-tier...@uiowa.edu wrote:
| On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| >
| > On 9 August 2018 at 20:37, Tomas Kalibera wrote:
| > | So to answer your original question, this could probably be handled in
| > | Rcpp,
| >
| > Hm. Why do you say that / what did y
> I'm now confident that I
> can avoid using "type" by itself, and instead always use it in a
> compound phrase (like type system) to avoid confusion. That leaves the
> `.type` argument to many vctrs functions. I'm considering change it to
> .prototype, because what you actually give it is a zero-l
I apologize if this issue has been raised before.
I really like object oriented S3 programming.
However, there's one feature of object oriented S3 programming that I don't
like.
Generic functions can have arguments other than dots.
Lets say you have an R package with something like:
print.myfun
A generic function is not simply a way to name two functions (methods)
the same. It has a particular purpose, and the argument names are
aligned with and convey that purpose. The methods only implement
polymorphism; they don't change the purpose. Changing the purpose
would make code unreadable.
Mi
On 09/08/2018 5:45 PM, Abs Spurdle wrote:
I apologize if this issue has been raised before.
I really like object oriented S3 programming.
However, there's one feature of object oriented S3 programming that I don't
like.
Generic functions can have arguments other than dots.
Lets say you have a
Thanks, Tomas, Luke, for the clarifications. Then, I have another question.
But first, let me introduce how I ended up here, because obviously I
just don't go around dyn.unloading things that I've just compiled. I
was testing a package with valgrind. Everything ok, no leaks. Great.
But I'm always
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM jan Vitek wrote:
>
> > I'm now confident that I
> > can avoid using "type" by itself, and instead always use it in a
> > compound phrase (like type system) to avoid confusion. That leaves the
> > `.type` argument to many vctrs functions. I'm considering change it to
Some ideas from the 'numeric tower' notion in scheme/lisp might also
be useful.
Best,
luke
On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Hadley Wickham wrote:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM jan Vitek wrote:
I'm now confident that I
can avoid using "type" by itself, and instead always use it in a
compound phrase (l
>
> I think there's a bit of that flavour here:
>
> vec_c(factor("a"), Sys.Date())
> #> Error: No common type for factor and date
>
> This isn't a type system imposed by the language, but I don't think
> that's a reason not to call it a type system.
All I am saying is that without a clear def
20 matches
Mail list logo
