similar to: ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ?

Removal of ans[nas] <- NA from the code of function 'ifelse' in R is not committed (yet). Why? -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 28/11/16, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ? Cc: R-devel at r-project.org, maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch Date: Monday, 28 November, 2016, 10:00

For S Ellison, just clarifying, I am Suharto Anggono, not Martin Maechler. "Martin et al.," from my previous E-mail was the beginning of message from Gabriel Becker, that I quoted. The quoted "still a bit disappointed that nobody has taken a look" is from Martin Maechler. In all of the proposed 'ifelse'-like functions so far, including from me (that I labeled as

Interspersed below. -------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ? To: R-devel at lists.R-project.org Date: Sunday, 27 November, 2016, 12:14 AM On current 'ifelse' code in R: ... * If 'test' is a factor, doing storage.mode(test) <- "logical" is not appropriate, but is.atomic(test) returns TRUE. Maybe use

Finally getting back to this : >>>>> Hadley Wickham <h.wickham at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 15 Aug 2016 07:51:35 -0500 writes: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Hadley Wickham > <h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> One possibility would also be to consider a >>> "numbers-only" or >>

On 06/08/2016 10:18 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: > Dear R-devel readers, > ( = people interested in the improvement and development of R). > > This is not the first time that this topic is raised. > and I am in now state to promise that anything will result from > this thread ... > > Still, I think the majority among us has agreed that > > 1) you should never use

>>>>> Gabriel Becker <gmbecker at ucdavis.edu> >>>>> on Tue, 15 Nov 2016 11:56:04 -0800 writes: > All, > Martin: Thanks for this and all the other things you are doing to both > drive R forward and engage more with the community about things like this. > Apologies for missing this discussion the first time it came around and if

>>>>> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> >>>>> on Sat, 26 Nov 2016 17:14:01 +0000 writes: > Just stating, in 'ifelse', 'test' is not recycled. As I said in "R-intro: length of 'ifelse' result" (https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2016-September/073136.html), ifelse(condition, a,

On 06.08.2016 17:30, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 06/08/2016 10:18 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: >> Dear R-devel readers, >> ( = people interested in the improvement and development of R). >> >> This is not the first time that this topic is raised. >> and I am in now state to promise that anything will result from >> this thread ... >> >> Still, I

Excuse for the delay; I had waited for other / additional comments and reactions (and been distracted with other urgent issues), but do want to keep this thread alive [inline] .. >>>>> Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> >>>>> on Sat, 6 Aug 2016 11:30:08 -0400 writes: > On 06/08/2016 10:18 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: >> Dear

> >> One possibility would also be to consider a "numbers-only" or > >> rather "same type"-only {e.g., would also work for characters} > >> version. > > > I don't know what you mean by these. > > In the mean time, Bob Rudis mentioned dplyr::if_else(), > which is very relevant, thank you Bob! > > As I have

All, Martin: Thanks for this and all the other things you are doing to both drive R forward and engage more with the community about things like this. Apologies for missing this discussion the first time it came around and if anything here has already been brought up, but I wonder what exactly you mean when you want recycling behavior. Specifically, based on an unrelated discussion with Henrik

Dear R-devel readers, ( = people interested in the improvement and development of R). This is not the first time that this topic is raised. and I am in now state to promise that anything will result from this thread ... Still, I think the majority among us has agreed that 1) you should never use ifelse(test, yes, no) if you know that length(test) == 1, in which case if(test) yes

Just stating, in 'ifelse', 'test' is not recycled. As I said in "R-intro: length of 'ifelse' result" (https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2016-September/073136.html), ifelse(condition, a, b) returns a vector of the length of 'condition', even if 'a' or 'b' is longer. On current 'ifelse' code in R: * The part ans[nas] <- NA

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Hadley Wickham <h.wickham at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> One possibility would also be to consider a "numbers-only" or >> >> rather "same type"-only {e.g., would also work for characters} >> >> version. >> >> > I don't know what you mean by these. >> >> In the

Hugh, (Note I speak for myself only and not for R-core) Thanks for looking into this. I think it's great to have community members that are interested in contributing to R and helping it continue to get better. And I think, and my local experiments bear out, that using anyNA as a fastpass condition does allow us to get a significant speedup over what's in there now. To do so, though, I

I found this part in the documentation of 'factor'. 'factor(x, exclude=NULL)' applied to a factor is a no-operation unless there are unused levels: in that case, a factor with the reduced level set is returned. If 'exclude' is used it should also be a factor with the same level set as 'x' or a set of codes for the levels to be excluded.

I am basically fine with the change. How about using just the following? if(!is.character(exclude)) exclude <- as.vector(exclude, typeof(x)) # may result in NA x <- as.character(x) It looks simpler and is, more or less, equivalent. In factor.Rd, in description of argument 'exclude', "(when \code{x} is a \code{factor} already)" can be removed. A larger

Logic.Rd has been changed again in r74377. After change: ? \item{x, y}{raw or logical or \sQuote{number-like} vectors (i.e., of ? ? types \code{\link{double}} (class \code{\link{numeric}}, ? ? \code{\link{integer}}) and \code{\link{complex}}), or objects for It is still inappropriate. As I said before, integer is not double. Right: numeric includes double and integer Wrong: double includes

I propose a patch to ifelse that leverages anyNA(test) to achieve an improvement in performance. For a test vector of length 10, the change nearly halves the time taken and for a test of length 1 million, there is a tenfold increase in speed. Even for small vectors, the distributions of timings between the old and the proposed ifelse do not intersect. The patch does not intend to change the

> I propose a patch to ifelse that leverages anyNA(test) to achieve an > improvement in performance. For a test vector of length 10, the change > nearly halves the time taken and for a test of length 1 million, there > is a tenfold increase in speed. Even for small vectors, the > distributions of timings between the old and the proposed ifelse do > not intersect. For smaller