Hello Ivan, thanks for this.
> Part of the problem is that it's not obvious what should be a
> zero-column but non-zero-row data.frame mean.
>
> On the one hand, your database relation use case is entirely valid. On
> the other hand, if data.frames are considered to be tables of data with
> row.names as their identifiers, then duplicated(d) should be returning
> logical(nrow(d)) for zero-column data.frames, since row.names are
> required to be unique. I'm sure that more interpretations can be
> devised, requiring some other behaviour for duplicated() and friends.
Do you mean the row names should mean all the rows should be counted as
non-duplicates?Yes, I can see the argument for that, thanks.I must say I'm
still puzzled at what interpretation would motivate the current behaviour of
returning a logical(0), however.
> Thankfully, duplicated() and anyDuplicated() are generic functions, and
> you can subclass your data frames to change their behaviour:
> > ...
Indeed, I'm already doing something along these lines!
Best Regards,Mark
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.
