>> I wonder if R is missing an equality operator for this case. Currently: >> >> * == is suboptimal because it's vectorised >> * all.equal is suboptimal because it returns TRUE or a text string >> * identical is suboptimal because it doesn't do common coercions >> >> Do we need another function (equals()?) that uses the same coercion >> rules as == but isn't vectorised? (Like == it would only work with >> vectors, so you'd still need identical() for (e.g.) comparing >> environments) > > I don't think so. We already have all(), so all(x == y) would do what you > want.
But that recycles, which is what we're trying to avoid here. Hadley -- http://had.co.nz/ ______________________________________________ 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.
