Hi Romain,
FWIW I see at least 2 small differences in the way sequence_c()
behaves with respect to good old sequence(): zeros and names.
sequence(c(a=5, b=0, c=2))
a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 c1 c2
1 2 3 4 5 1 2
sequence_c() ignores the names and doesn't support zeros in the input.
Cheers,
H.
On
Hello,
Based on yesterday's R-help thread (help: program efficiency), and
following Bill's suggestions, it appeared that sequence:
sequence
function (nvec)
unlist(lapply(nvec, seq_len))
environment: namespace:base
could benefit from being written in C to avoid unnecessary memory
Is sequence used enough to warrant this? As the help page says
Note that ‘sequence - function(nvec) unlist(lapply(nvec,
seq_len))’ and it mainly exists in reverence to the very early
history of R.
I regard it as unsafe to assume that NA_INTEGER will always be
negative, and bear
Le 28/11/10 10:30, Prof Brian Ripley a écrit :
Is sequence used enough to warrant this? As the help page says
Note that ‘sequence - function(nvec) unlist(lapply(nvec,
seq_len))’ and it mainly exists in reverence to the very early
history of R.
I don't know. Would it be used more if it were
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Romain Francois wrote:
Le 28/11/10 10:30, Prof Brian Ripley a écrit :
Is sequence used enough to warrant this? As the help page says
Note that ‘sequence - function(nvec) unlist(lapply(nvec,
seq_len))’ and it mainly exists in reverence to the very early
history of R.
I
Le 28/11/10 11:30, Prof Brian Ripley a écrit :
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Romain Francois wrote:
Le 28/11/10 10:30, Prof Brian Ripley a écrit :
Is sequence used enough to warrant this? As the help page says
Note that ‘sequence - function(nvec) unlist(lapply(nvec,
seq_len))’ and it mainly exists in
