On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 6:08 PM, peter dalgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 9, 2011, at 00:29 , Dennis Murphy wrote:
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> Here are a couple of ways; there may well be better ones.
>>
>> # (1) Use the get() function:
>> mean_on_element=function(data, elem_name) {
>> with(data, mean(get(elem_name)))
>> }
>> mean_on_element(data, 'x')
>
> I suspect this goes belly-up if there's a column data$elem_name, though.
>
> Given than with() is essentially evalq() which in turn is
> eval(quote(...),...), the obvious way to achieve the desired effect would be
> to omit quoting the argument and do
>
> eval(substitute(mean(elem_name)), data)
>
> or, to avoid unexpected variable capture:
>
> mean_on_element <- function(data, elem_name)
> eval(substitute(mean(elem_name)), data, parent.frame())
>
> mean_on_element(airquality, Day)
>
> Or rather: this allows variable capture of the same kind that with() allows:
>
>> mean_on_element(airquality, X)
> [1] 0.575
>> with(airquality, mean(X))
> [1] 0.575
I guess the conclusion is that there is extra work to refactor the
code that use 'with' into a function. Am I correct?
For example, I have the following code that use 'with'.
data=list(
x1=1
, x2=1
, x3=1
, x4=1
, x4=1
, x6=1
) #could be a very long list.
with(data, x1+x3+x6) # could specify an arbitrary number of elements to sum.
However, if I want to refactor it into a function, I basically have to
rewrite the whole statement (based the replies in this thread, it
doesn't seems that there is not a way to not to change the code too
much during refactoring). Therefore, in order to make the code
refactorable, it is better not use 'with'. (Although 'with' is more
useful in interactive environment when it is desirable to have to
press less keystrokes.) Is my conclusion correct?
my_sum=function(data, name_list) {
sum(unlist(data[name_list]))
}
my_sum(data, c('x1', 'x3', 'x6'))
>>
>> # (2) Lose 'with' and use subscripting instead:
>> mean_on_element=function(data, elem_name) {
>> mean(data[[elem_name]])
>> }
>> mean_on_element(data, 'x')
>>
>> Since 'x' is quoted in the function call, you need to use code that
>> can convert the string 'x' to extracting the data object with name x.
>>
>> HTH,
>> Dennis
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:12 PM, [email protected]
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I want to enclose with() in a function mean_on_element. Obviously, it
>>> is not working. The problem is how to specify the element name with a
>>> function body. Does anybody have any suggestion? Thanks!
>>>
>>>> data=list(x=1:10)
>>>> with(data, mean(x))
>>> [1] 5.5
>>>>
>>>> mean_on_element=function(data, elem_name) {
>>> + with(data, mean(elem_name))
>>> + }
>>>> mean_on_element(data, 'x')
>>> [1] NA
>>> Warning message:
>>> In mean.default(elem_name) :
>>> argument is not numeric or logical: returning NA
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> [email protected] 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.
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> [email protected] 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.
>
> --
> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
> Phone: (+45)38153501
> Email: [email protected] Priv: [email protected]
> "Døden skal tape!" --- Nordahl Grieg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Tom
______________________________________________
[email protected] 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.
