Data frames are lists of columns. The names() function is appropriate for
lists.
It doesn't pay to fall into the trap of thinking that data frames are truly
symmetric between columns and rows, because there is a performance penalty for
accessing rows that is greater than the cost of accessing columns. With that in
mind, thinking of data frames as lists is preferred, so names is preferred over
colnames.
--
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.
On April 2, 2016 5:54:10 PM PDT, Boris Steipe <boris.ste...@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>The help text for row+colnames {base} states:
>
> "For a data frame, rownames and colnames eventually call row.names
> and names respectively, but the latter are preferred."
>
>Why are they "preferred"?
>Why is it names(), not col.names()?
>I have only ever used names() for vectors - I'm surprised it works on
>data.frames... IMO this is not great for code readability, thus
>thinking to require rownames(), colnames() for all 2D objects, names()
>for vectors and lists. Any problems with this approach?
>
>
>Thanks for some insight!
>Boris
>______________________________________________
>R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>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.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.
