Sounds like a good idea. Would it be possible to give an example of how to combine plyr with data.table, and why that is better than a data.table only solution ?
"hadley wickham" <h.wick...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:f8e6ff051001200624r2175e38xf558dc8fa3fb6...@mail.gmail.com... > Note that in the documentaton ?"[.data.table" where I say that 'by' is > slow, > I mean relative to how fast it could be. Its seems, in this specific > example anyway, and with the code posted so far, to be significantly > faster > than sqldf and plyr. Of course the best of both worlds would be to use data table within plyr to get both speed and a consistent syntax for other types of split-apply-combine tasks. Hadley -- 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.
