Hi
I have doing the R-exercises to improve my R programming capabilities.
Data.frame exercise 4 showed me that I have a language problem. Here's the
problem and my "solution".
# Exercise 4# Create a simple data frame from 3 vectors. Order the entire
data frame by the# first column.df2 <- data.frame(a = 5:1,b = letters[1:5], c
= runif(5))order(df2$a) Naturally the order function did nothing.
Per "help"Description
order returns a permutation which rearranges its first argument into ascending
or descending order, breaking ties by further arguments. sort.list is the same,
using only one argument.See the examples for how to use these functions to sort
data frames, etc.
Usage
order(..., na.last = TRUE, decreasing = FALSE, method = c("shell",
"radix"))
sort.list(x, partial = NULL, na.last = TRUE, decreasing = FALSE,
method = c("shell", "quick", "radix"))Arguments
... a sequence of numeric, complex, character or logical vectors, all of the
same length, or a classed R object.
Well, doesn't ... mean any legal object? I gave it a legal object and got
nada.And the answer absolutely has me screaming "Say
What"df2[with(df2,order(a)),]
What's with "with? It is one function I do not use because I find it
incomprehensible. To witEvaluate an R expression in an environment constructed
from data, possibly modifying (a copy of) the original data.
First of all, if I'm not modifying data (or as a subset activity creating
data), why an I doing whatever it is I'm doing? ("possibly modifying (a copy
of) the original data.")
Evaluate. According to the thesarus A) assess(v), b) appraise, c) gage.
OK, am I in a safe area? I'll evaluate that. Do I desire future social
contact with this person? I'll evaluate that.In no way do I ever evaluate an
equation. I may attempt to solve it. I may do a computer program to do the
calculations and return a result. I will probably evaluate the result as to
whether or not it helps solve the problem. Think in terms of an income tax
return. But evaluate an R expression? No clue what that might mean.
The remainder of the definition is also obtuse. an R expression in an
environment constructed from data. Why would one make an environment without
data? Obviously I am missing the point. My own created function makes a new
environment, but I only created it to crunch numbers. If it doesn't crunch
numbers it's useless.
The point is, I do not understand the definition of "with" and thus have no
idea how to use it. I guess computerese is analogous to taxlawese. Familiar
words have entirely different meanings.
Carl Sutton CPA
[[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.
