Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "names function for environments?"
2015 Jan 27
2
names function for environments?
I think ls(, sort=FALSE) would be more explicit and thus clearer. There is
much precedent for having arguments that request less work to be done e.g.
unlist(use.names=FALSE). Yes, the extra typing is a bit painful, but there
is no intuitive reason why names() would be unsorted, while ls() would be
sorted. While it is tempting to use an existing function for this, the word
"names" is
2015 Jan 27
2
names function for environments?
Since the contract of ls() is to sort, there is nothing wrong with
programmers depending on it. And there are many functions that could be
made 60X faster, but is it worth it? But I did notice that
as.list.environment has a sorted=FALSE argument already, so I guess
identical(names(x), names(as.list(x))) could be made to be TRUE, assuming
the order is at least persistent, if undefined, so that is a
2015 Jan 27
0
names function for environments?
>>>>> Peter Haverty <haverty.peter at gene.com>
>>>>> on Sun, 25 Jan 2015 12:21:04 -0800 writes:
> Hi all,
> The "ls" function wears two hats. It allows users to inspect an
> environment interactively and also serves deeper in code as the
> accessor for an environment's names/keys. I propose that we separate
2015 Jan 27
0
names function for environments?
I think that the "sorted" and "all.names" arguments are really only
appropriate for pretty printing to the screen. I think it is a bit
unfortunate that environments have a names accessor that is 60X slower
than all the other types. This is likely due to the history of
environments, which were originally just for behind-the-scenes tasks.
Now that users can use environments as
2015 Jan 29
0
names function for environments?
>>>>> Michael Lawrence <lawrence.michael at gene.com>
>>>>> on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:59:59 -0800 writes:
> Since the contract of ls() is to sort, there is nothing wrong with
> programmers depending on it. And there are many functions that could be
> made 60X faster, but is it worth it? But I did notice that
> as.list.environment
2015 Jan 29
1
names function for environments?
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Martin Maechler <
maechler at lynne.stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote:
> >>>>> Michael Lawrence <lawrence.michael at gene.com>
> >>>>> on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:59:59 -0800 writes:
>
> > Since the contract of ls() is to sort, there is nothing wrong with
> > programmers depending on it. And there are
2015 Jan 22
5
:: and ::: as .Primitives?
Hi all,
When S4 methods are defined on base function (say, "match"), the
function becomes a method with the body "base::match(x,y)". A call to
such a function often spends more time doing "::" than in the function
itself. I always assumed that "::" was a very low-level thing, but it
turns out to be a plain old function defined in base/R/namespace.R.
What
2015 Jan 22
5
:: and ::: as .Primitives?
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:44 AM, <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote:
>
> For default methods there ought to be a way to create those so the
> default method is computed at creation or load time and stored in an
> environment.
We had considered that, but we thought the definition of the function
would be easier to interpret if it explicitly specified the namespace,
instead of
2015 Jan 21
2
reducing redundant work in methods package
Doing it like this:
genericForPrimitive <- function(f, where = topenv(parent.frame()), mustFind
= TRUE) {
ans = .BasicFunsList[[f]]
## this element may not exist (yet, during loading), dom't test null
if(mustFind && identical(ans, FALSE))
stop(gettextf("methods may not be defined for primitive function %s
in this version of R",
2015 Jan 22
3
speedbump in library
Hi all,
Profiling turned up a bit of a speedbump in the library function. I
submitted a patch to the R bug tracker as bug 16168 and I've also
included it below. The alternate code is simpler and easier to
read/maintain, I believe. Any thoughts on other ways to write this?
Index: src/library/base/R/library.R
===================================================================
---
2015 Jan 08
3
setequal: better readability, reduced memory footprint, and minor speedup
How about unique them both and compare the lengths? It's less work,
especially allocation.
Pete
____________________
Peter M. Haverty, Ph.D.
Genentech, Inc.
phaverty at gene.com
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:30 PM, peter dalgaard <pdalgd at gmail.com> wrote:
> If you look at the definition of %in%, you'll find that it is implemented
> using match, so if we did as you suggest,
2015 Jan 21
2
reducing redundant work in methods package
Hi all,
The function call series genericForPrimitive -> .findBasicFuns -> .findAll
happens 4400 times while the GenomicRanges package is loading. Each time
.findAll follows a chain of environments to determine that the methods
namespace is the only one that holds a variable called .BasicFunsList. This
accounts for ~10% of package loading time. I'm sure there is some history
to that
2014 Dec 03
2
we need an exists/get hybrid
Thanks Winston! I'm amazed that "[[" beats calling the .Internal
directly. I guess the difference between .Primitive vs. .Internal is
pretty significant for things on this time scale.
NULL meaning NULL and NULL meaning undefined would lead to the same path
for much of my code. I'll be swapping out many exists and get calls later
today. Thanks!
I do still think it would be
2015 Jan 22
1
:: and ::: as .Primitives?
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:44 AM, <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote:
> I'm not convinced that how to make :: faster is the right question. If
> you are finding foo::bar being called often enough to matter to your
> overall performance then to me the question is: why are you calling
> foo::bar more than once? Making :: a bit faster by making it a
> primitive will remove
2014 Dec 03
2
we need an exists/get hybrid
Hi All,
I've been looking into speeding up the loading of packages that use a lot
of S4. After profiling I noticed the "exists" function accounts for a
surprising fraction of the time. I have some thoughts about speeding up
exists (below). More to the point of this post, Martin M?chler noted that
'exists' and 'get' are often used in conjunction. Both functions are
2015 Jan 23
1
:: and ::: as .Primitives?
Hi,
On 01/23/2015 07:01 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Michael Lawrence wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:44 AM, <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> For default methods there ought to be a way to create those so the
>>> default method is computed at creation or load time and stored in an
>>>
2015 Jan 09
2
RFC: getifexists() {was [Bug 16065] "exists" ...}
>>>>> Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch>
>>>>> on Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:00:38 +0100 writes:
>>>>> Michael Lawrence <lawrence.michael at gene.com>
>>>>> on Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:02:26 -0800 writes:
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:57 AM, <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 8
2016 May 09
2
Regression in match() in R 3.3.0 when matching strings with different character encodings
Hi
I think the following behavior is a regression from R 3.2.5:
> match(iconv( c("\u00f8", "A"), from = "UTF8", to = "latin1" ),
"\u00f8")
[1] 1 NA
> match(iconv( c("\u00f8"), from = "UTF8", to = "latin1" ), "\u00f8")
[1] NA
> match(iconv( c("\u00f8"), from = "UTF8",
2006 Oct 15
1
Feature request: names(someEnv) same as ls(someEnv)
Hi,
I would be nice if names() returned the equivalent of ls() for
environments.
--- a/src/main/attrib.c
+++ b/src/main/attrib.c
@@ -687,6 +687,8 @@ SEXP attribute_hidden do_names(SEXP call
s = CAR(args);
if (isVector(s) || isList(s) || isLanguage(s))
return getAttrib(s, R_NamesSymbol);
+ if (isEnvironment(s))
+ return R_lsInternal(s, 0);
return R_NilValue;
}
2015 Jan 22
0
:: and ::: as .Primitives?
Hi all,
I use Luke's "::" hoisting trick often. I think it would be fantastic
if the JIT just did that for you.
The main trouble, for me, is in code I don't own. When common
Bioconductor packages are loaded many, many base functions are saddled
with this substantial dispatch and "::" overhead.
While we have the hood up, the parser could help out a bit here too.
It