Arunkumar Srinivasan wrote > `rbindlist` gained speed (to some extent) by assuming things like this and > skipping checks in the first place. So, should we include checks like > this? Also, if "rbind" and/or "rbindlist" are made to do the exact same > thing, then, what's the purpose of "rbindlist"?
My vote for the purpose of rbindlist is to continue to be a fast version of rbind for data.tables, while providing as much functionality as possible. Could the functionality be optional? In "bare bones mode" it would be super fast, and in "full featured mode" it would probably be faster than rbind but slower than "bare bones". Like Garrett, I would like to have the option of binding by column names in rbindlist. In addition, it would be great if rbindlist could handle missing columns. The smartbind function in gtools <http://cran.stat.ucla.edu/web/packages/gtools/index.html> does both of these. -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/rbind-vs-rbindlist-behavior-warning-tp4680116p4680743.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
