I'd agree with Eduard, although it's probably too late to change behavior now. Maybe for data.table.2? Eduard's proposal seems more closely aligned with SQL behavior as well (SELECT/JOIN, then GROUP, but only if requested).
S. > Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:17:59 -0700 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [datatable-help] changing data.table by-without-by syntax > to require a "by" > > I think you're missing the point Michael. Just because it's possible to do it > the way it's done now, doesn't mean that's the best way, as I've tried to > argue in the OP. I don't think you've addressed the issue of unnecessary > complexity pointed out in OP. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/changing-data-table-by-without-by-syntax-to-require-a-by-tp4664770p4664990.html > Sent from the datatable-help mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > datatable-help mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/datatable-help
_______________________________________________ datatable-help mailing list [email protected] https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/datatable-help
