somewhat `esoteric' problem/bug :
## Constructing an empty data.frame (e.g. for later rbind()ing), works with
data.frame(a = 1[-1])
## or
data.frame(a = 1[-1], b = "c"[-1])
## but {these give warnings, but *work* with S+ (5.1)
## giving the NULL data.frame, i.e. the same as data.frame()
## --- which I don't like either: NULL should behave as numeric(0)
here!}:
data.frame(a = NULL) # fails with R
data.frame(a = NULL, b= NULL)# fails
----------
This is really a request for comment.
In my opinion I should get data.frames with 1 or 2 columns and 0 rows in
all cases. R fails completely, and S+ (5.1) gives the NULL.
I'd like to fix R such that `` NULL behaves as numeric(0) '' in
this
situation.
Comments?
Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch>
http://stat.ethz.ch/~maechler/
Seminar fuer Statistik, ETH-Zentrum LEO D10 Leonhardstr. 27
ETH (Federal Inst. Technology) 8092 Zurich SWITZERLAND
phone: x-41-1-632-3408 fax: ...-1228 <><
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To:
r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
