On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Snipping down to bare minimum history before comment:
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Olaf Mersmann
> wrote:
>> Dear Hadly, dear list,
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>>
system.time(replicate(1e4, base:
Snipping down to bare minimum history before comment:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Olaf Mersmann
wrote:
> Dear Hadly, dear list,
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>
>>> system.time(replicate(1e4, base::print))
>> user system elapsed
>> 0.539 0.001 0.541
>>> s
Dear Hadly, dear list,
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> I wondered about this statement too but:
>
>> system.time(replicate(1e4, base::print))
> user system elapsed
> 0.539 0.001 0.541
>> system.time(replicate(1e4, print))
> user system elapsed
> 0.013 0.000
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Paul Gilbert
wrote:
> (subject changed from: RE: [Rd] Avoiding name clashes: opinion on best
> practice naming conventions)
>
> Dominick,
>
> Is this really true? Is there a speed advantage to defining a local function
> this way, say, within another function, a
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Paul Gilbert
wrote:
> (subject changed from: RE: [Rd] Avoiding name clashes: opinion on best
> practice naming conventions)
>
> Dominick
>
> Is this really true? Is there a speed advantage to defining a local function
> this way, say, within another function, a
Hi Paul,
> `:::`
function (pkg, name)
{
pkg <- as.character(substitute(pkg))
name <- as.character(substitute(name))
get(name, envir = asNamespace(pkg), inherits = FALSE)
}
and
> `::`
function (pkg, name)
{
pkg <- as.character(substitute(pkg))
name <- as.character(substitute(
(subject changed from: RE: [Rd] Avoiding name clashes: opinion on best practice
naming conventions)
Dominick
Is this really true? Is there a speed advantage to defining a local function
this way, say, within another function, and then calling it within a loop
rather than the original? Do you
