> Note however that I've never seen evidence for a *practical*
> difference in simple cases, and also of such cases as part of a
> larger computation.
> But I'm happy to see one if anyone has an interesting example.
>
> E.g., I would typically never use 0L:100L instead of 0:100
> in an R script because I think code readability (and self
> explainability) is of considerable importance too.
But : casts to integer anyway:
> str(0:100)
int [1:101] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...
And performance in this case is (obviously) negligible:
> library(microbenchmark)
> microbenchmark(as.integer(c(0, 100)), times = 1000)
Unit: nanoeconds
min lq median uq max
as.integer(c(0, 100)) 712 791 813 896 15840
(mainly included as opportunity to try out microbenchmark)
So you save ~800 ns but typing two letters probably takes 0.2 s (100
wpm, ~ 5 letters per word + space = 0.1s per letter), so it only saves
you time if you're going to be calling it more than 125000 times ;)
Hadley
--
Assistant Professor / Dobelman Family Junior Chair
Department of Statistics / Rice University
http://had.co.nz/
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org 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.
