>>>>> "TP" == Tony Plate <tpl...@acm.org>
>>>>> on Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:01:21 -0700 writes:
TP> Martin Maechler wrote:
>>>>>>> "TP" == Tony Plate <tpl...@acm.org>
>>>>>>> on Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:10:04 -0700 writes:
>>>>>>>
>>
TP> Martin Maechler wrote:
>> >>>>>>> "PatB" == Patrick Burns <pbu...@pburns.seanet.com>
>> >>>>>>> on Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:00:40 +0000 writes:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>
PatB> Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
>> >> >> Hi.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Prof Brian Ripley
>> >> >> <rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> What you have is a one-dimensional array: they crop up
>> >> >>> in R most often from table() in my experience.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> f <- table(rpois(100, 4)) str(f)
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> 'table' int [, 1:10] 2 6 18 21 13 16 13 4 3 4 - attr(*,
>> >> >>> "dimnames")=List of 1 ..$ : chr [1:10] "0" "1" "2" "3"
>> >> >>> ...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> and yes, f is an atmoic vector and yes, str()'s notation
>> >> >>> is confusing here but if it did [1:10] you would not
>> >> >>> know it was an array. I recall discussing this with
>> >> >>> Martin Maechler (str's author) last century, and I've
>> >> >>> just checked that R 2.0.0 did the same.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The place in which one-dimensional arrays differ from
>> >> >>> normal vectors is how names are handled: notice that my
>> >> >>> example has dimnames not names, and ?names says
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> For a one-dimensional array the 'names' attribute really
>> >> >>> is 'dimnames[[1]]'.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks for this explanation. One could then argue that
>> >> >> [1:10,] is somewhat better than [,1:10], but that is just polish.
>> >>
>> >> yes. And honestly I don't remember anymore why I chose the
>> >> "[,1:n]" notation. It definitely was there already before R
>> >> came into existence, as S also has had one-dimensional arrays,
>> >> and I programmed the first version of str() in 1990.
>> >>
PatB> Perhaps it could be:
>> >>
PatB> [1:10(,)]
PatB> That is weird enough that it should not lead people to
PatB> believe that it is a matrix. But might prompt them a
PatB> bit in that direction.
>> >>
>> >> Well, str() was always aimed a bit at experienced S (and R)
>> >> users, and I had always aimed somewhat to keep it's output
>> >> "compact". I'm quite astonished that the OP didn't know about
>> >> 1D arrays in spite of the many years he's been using R.
>> >> Would a wierd solution like the above have helped?
>> >>
>> >> At the moment, I'd tend to keep it "as is" if only just for
>> >> historical reminescence, but I can be convinced to change the
>> >> current "tendency" ...
>> >>
>> >> Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich
>> >>
TP> What about just including "(1d-array)", something like this
>> >> str(f)
TP> 'table' int [1:10](1d array) 5 5 9 23 26 16 9 4 2 1
TP> - attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 1
TP> ..$ : chr [1:10] "0" "1" "2" "3" ...
>> >>
TP> only 9 extra characters for a rare case, and much, much less cryptic?
>>
>> well,.. the next text request is to use
>> "character" instead of "chr", only 6 extra characters ....
>>
>> -> no way: str() has its very concise "style" and should keep that.
>>
TP> Brevity is good, but clarity is important too. The output of str is
TP> usually decipherable, but not so much in this case. It's easy to
TP> dismiss suggestions like replacing "chr" with "character" - the
increase
TP> in clarity would be minimal. However, the potential increase in
clarity
TP> for a 1-d array is significant - the decrease in brevity is at question
TP> here. Given the rarity of the case it seems like a decent tradeoff to
TP> add "(1d-array)" (one could even just write "(1d)"). 1-d arrays are
TP> sufficiently rare that no concise and clear method of indicating them
TP> using brackets or other symbols has arisen. You did say you "can be
TP> convinced to change" it, but I won't attempt beyond this! :-)
well, "still can be .." .....
So you currently propose to replace
"int [,1:10] 5 5 9 23 26 16 9 4 2 1"
by
"int [1:10](1d) 5 5 9 23 26 16 9 4 2 1"
where Pat had
"int [1:10(,)] 5 5 9 23 26 16 9 4 2 1"
Since the [.....] is where we specify the dimensionality of all
arrays in str(), I'd like to try something where things remain
inside "[....]" as with Pat's version or e.g., with
"int [1:10/1d] 5 5 9 23 26 16 9 4 2 1"
Opinions, further proposals ?
Martin
PatB> Patrick Burns patr...@burns-stat.com +44 (0)20 8525
PatB> 0696 http://www.burns-stat.com (home of "The R
PatB> Inferno" and "A Guide for the Unwilling S User")
>> >> >> /Henrik
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I think these days we have enough internal glue in place
>> >> >>> that an end user would not notice the difference (but
>> >> >>> those working at C level with R objects may need to
>> >> >>> know).
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> Ran into the follow intermediate case in an external
>> >> >>>> package (w/ recent R v2.8.1 patched and R v2.9.0
>> >> >>>> devel):
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> x <- 1:2 dim(x) <- 2 dim(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] 2
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> x
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] 1 2
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> str(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> int [, 1:2] 1 2
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> nrow(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] 2
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> ncol(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] NA
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> is.vector(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] FALSE
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> is.matrix(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] FALSE
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> is.array(x)
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] TRUE
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> x[1]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] 1
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> x[,1]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> Error in x[, 1] : incorrect number of dimensions
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> x[1,]
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> Error in x[1, ] : incorrect number of dimensions
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Is str() treating single-dimension arrays incorrectly?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> What does it mean to have a single dimension this way?
>> >> >>>> Should it equal a vector? I am aware of "is.vector
>> >> >>>> returns FALSE if x has any attributes except names".
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> /Henrik
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ______________________________________________
>> >> >>>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >>
>> >>>> Brian D. Ripley, rip...@stats.ox.ac.uk Professor of Applied
>> >>>>
>> >> >>> Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
>> >> >>> University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1
>> >> >>> South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG,
>> >> >>> UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ______________________________________________
>> >> >>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>> ______________________________________________
>> >>>
>> >> >> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> ______________________________________________
PatB> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
PatB> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >>
>> >> ______________________________________________
>> >> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >>
>> >>
>>
TP> ______________________________________________
TP> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
TP> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>>
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
