> 2. It's more flexible to construct the language object as a language object,
> rather than pasting something together and parsing it. For one thing, that
> allows non-syntactic variable names; I think it's also easier to read. So
> your code
>
> txt<- paste("tabular(value*v*", LEFT , "~" ,RIGHT ,", data = m_xx,
> suppressLabels = 2,...)", sep = "")
> eval(parse(text = txt ))
>
> could be rewritten as
>
> formula<- substitute( value*v*LEFT ~ RIGHT, list(LEFT=LEFT, RIGHT=RIGHT))
> tabular(formula, data = m_xx, suppressLabels = 2, ...)
To be strictly correct, shouldn't that be:
formula<- eval(substitute( value*v*LEFT ~ RIGHT, list(LEFT=LEFT, RIGHT=RIGHT)))
?
> It might make sense to put something like this into the tables package, but
> I don't want to have a dependency on reshape.
Would you consider making tabular generic?
Hadley
--
Assistant Professor / Dobelman Family Junior Chair
Department of Statistics / Rice University
http://had.co.nz/
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
