Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > No, AFAIK. It was definitely not documented to last November when that > comment was added to ?subset. > > > Bottomline: unless I find the time to submit a patch for '[.data.frame', > > I'll need to use the more elaborate way of dropping the unused levels? > > > > Does "will not drop" imply that it cannot be programmed, should not be > > programmed, or has not been programmed yet? > > It is designed not to. Look at how ?"[.data.frame" documents it. We > don't want it altered and it would break a lot of code to do so. I think > the author of those lines was under a misapprension.
Not to say confused... (Brian is tactful enough not to say it was me). Looking back through my emails from then, I can't say it's all that surprising. It came from a feature request (the author of which shall remain anonymous): ... > noticed that subset.data.frame has drop=FALSE `hard-wired` > into it, making it problematic in case of factors (depending > on required behaviour). and with 3 days to go before 1.8.1, I seem to have just implemented the suggestion without thinking. (I think we did have a drop.factor at some point back in the stone age where factors were a primitive data type, which may have contributed to the confusion.) -- O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3 c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
