Hi, Gabriel:
On 12/8/22 8:20 PM, Gabriel Becker wrote:
Hi Spencer,
My 2c.
According to the docs, factors are special-cased. Other S3 'classes'
could be special-cased, such as Date in your example, I suppose, but it
is not clear how what you're describing could be implemented for the
general case.
Suppose I define an S3 "class" called my_awesome_class, and have a list
of 3 of them in it, and no other guarantees are provided. What should,
or even could, R do in the case of unlist(list_of_awesomes)?
There is no guarantee that I as an S3 developer have provided a c method
for my class such that we could say the unlist call above is equivalent
(roughly) to do.call(c, list_of_awesomes), nor that I provided any other
particular "mash this set of my_awesome_class objects into one". Nor is
it even guaranteed that the concept of combining my_awesome_classobjects
is even coherent, or would produce a new my_awesome_classobject when
performed if it is.
What about adding another argument to create, e.g.,
unlist(x, recursive = TRUE, use.names = TRUE, attributeFunction=NULL)
Then assign the assign the results of the current "unlist(x, ...)"
to, say, "ux", and follow that by
if(!is.null(attributeFunction))attributes(ux) <- attributeFunction(x)
return(ux)
An alternative could be to have a default attributeFunction, that
computes the attributes of each component of x and keeps only the ones
that are shared by all components of x. This would be the same as the
current behavior for factors IF each component had the same factor
levels and would drop attributes that are different between components.
For S4 classes, if the attributes were not ALL identical, then all the
attributes would be dropped, as with the current behavior. This should
not be a problem for S3 generics, because they should always check to
make sure all the required attributes are available.
That said, your example was of length one,
My example was of length one to provide a minimal, self-contained
example. That was motivated by a more complicated example, which took
me a couple of hours to understand why it wasn't working as I expected ;-)
Thanks for your reply.
Spencer Graves
we could special case (the
default method of) unlist so that for x /not a list/, we're guaranteed that
identical(unlist(list(x)), x) == TRUE
This would simplify certain code, such as the one from your motivating
example, but at the cost of making the output of unlist across inputs
less consistent and less easy to reason about and predict. In other
words the answer to the question "what class is
unlist(list_of_awesomes)? " would become "it depends on how many of them
are in the list"... That wouldn't be a good thing on balance, imho.
Best,
~G
On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 5:44 PM Spencer Graves
<spencer.gra...@effectivedefense.org
<mailto:spencer.gra...@effectivedefense.org>> wrote:
Consider:
> str(unlist(list(Sys.Date())))
num 19334
> str(unlist(list(factor('a'))))
Factor w/ 1 level "a": 1
I naively expected "str(unlist(list(Sys.Date())))" to
return an
object of class 'Date'. After some thought, I felt a need to ask this
list if they think that the core R language might benefit from
modifying
the language so "str(unlist(list(Sys.Date())))" was of class 'Date', at
least as an option.
Comments?
Thanks,
Spencer Graves
> sessionInfo()
R version 4.2.2 (2022-10-31)
Platform: x86_64-apple-darwin17.0 (64-bit)
Running under: macOS Big Sur 11.7.1
Matrix products: default
LAPACK:
/Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Versions/4.2/Resources/lib/libRlapack.dylib
locale:
[1] en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/C/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8
attached base packages:
[1] stats graphics grDevices utils datasets methods base
loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
[1] compiler_4.2.2 tools_4.2.2
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org <mailto:R-devel@r-project.org> mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel>
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
