search for: 18042l

Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "18042l".

Did you mean: 18042
2019 May 26
2
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
...elchirico4 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Have finally managed to come up with a fix after checking out sys.calls() > from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: > > [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) > [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) > [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > [[5]] as.Date(value) > [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) > > I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to assign to > the output block by block? Anyway, we didn't have a [<- method. And > [<-.Da...
2019 May 26
2
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
Debugging this issue: https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/issues/2008 We have custom class 'IDate' which inherits from 'Date' (it just forces integer storage for efficiency, hence, I). The concatenation done by rbind, however, breaks this and returns a double: library(data.table) DF = data.frame(date = as.IDate(Sys.Date())) storage.mode(rbind(DF, DF)$date) # [1]
2019 May 27
2
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
...ly managed to come up with a fix after checking out > sys.calls() > > > from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: > > > > > > [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) > > > [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) > > > [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > > > [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > > > [[5]] as.Date(value) > > > [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) > > > > > > I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to > assign to > > > the output block by bloc...
2019 May 26
0
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
Have finally managed to come up with a fix after checking out sys.calls() from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) [[5]] as.Date(value) [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to assign to the output block by block? Anyway, we didn't have a [<- method. And [<-.Date looks like: value <- unclas...
2019 Jun 02
1
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
...hecking out sys.calls() > >> > > from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: > >> > > > >> > > [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) > >> > > [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) > >> > > [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > >> > > [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > >> > > [[5]] as.Date(value) > >> > > [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to assign to...
2019 May 27
0
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
...> > > > Have finally managed to come up with a fix after checking out sys.calls() > > from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: > > > > [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) > > [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) > > [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > > [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) > > [[5]] as.Date(value) > > [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) > > > > I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to assign to > > the output block by block? Anyway, we didn't have a [&l...
2019 May 27
0
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
...ome up with a fix after checking out sys.calls() >> > > from within the as.Date.IDate debugger, which shows something like: >> > > >> > > [[1]] rbind(DF, DF) >> > > [[2]] rbind(deparse.level, ...) >> > > [[3]] `[<-`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) >> > > [[4]] `[<-.Date`(`*tmp*`, ri, value = 18042L) >> > > [[5]] as.Date(value) >> > > [[6]] as.Date.IDate(value) >> > > >> > > I'm not sure why [<- is called, I guess the implementation is to assign to >> > > the o...