On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Josh O'Brien wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Roger Bivand <roger.biv...@nhh.no> wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Josh O'Brien wrote:
<...snip...>
By the way, always avoid accessing S4 objects directly using @, do use
slot(obj, "slotname") - the sapply should read:
area = sapply(slot(SPclus, "polygons"), slot, "area")
for the SO version with possibly incorrect areas, and
area = gArea(SPclus, byid=TRUE)
for correct ones.
Would you mind explaining why the functional form, slot(obj, "slotname"),
should always be used instead of obj@slotname ? I've seen this admonition
repeatedly -- I think just from you -- and don't know whether it's a purely
stylistic preference on your part, or whether there is some other
rationale for preferring that form.
When sp was written (2003-5), we chose to use S4 (new style) classes. We
used Chambers (1998), referring to Ch. 7, and on slots pp. 290-292. There
the distinction between S3 (old style) "$" and "$<-" access and
replacement methods, and S4 "@" and particularly "@<-" was made more
forcefully than in Chambers (2008). Contemporary uses described in
Venables and Ripley (2000) also distinguish between the two.
All of these point to the formal use of S4 class definitions, not least to
ensure that storage mode checking when using .C() and .Call() cease to be
so time-consuming. This is an issue with S3 classes, because there is
nothing to stop the user modifying the storage mode of list components,
with potentially bad consequences in compiled code. Defensive changes in
the underlying R engine to detect mode mismatch were introduced very much
later, I believe, so mode mismatch could crash the engine until them.
For both S3 and S4 classes, the user is encouraged to use access functions
where provided. If the classes and methods are sufficiently well written,
there should only be a few occasions in which the user might want to
access components (S3) or slots (S4) that are not exposed via methods. If
scripts consistently contain @, and no access or replacement methods are
provided, consider asking the package maintainer to add the missing
functionality. slot() is a little less ugly, but the user shouldn't really
need it either, unless something inside an object has to be shown or
manipulated.
In this case, the "area" slot is documented, but precisely because it is
not intended to be used as a measure of area, there is no access method.
The danger is that "@<-" and "$<-" are used to insert values into
components/slots without sufficient care being taken; access is perhaps
less of a problem.
I particularly react to usages such as:
sdf@data$var
for sdf a Spatial*DataFrame object, as "$" and "$<-" methods *are*
provided to let these objects appear to be data.frame objects. This usage
is redundant, and displays ignorance about the class/method systems in S
and R. Of course, all are free to write what they like, so my preferences
may be just a matter of taste, but at least they are based on the books
written to establish the structure of the language.
Hope this clarifies,
Roger
FWIW, the ?slot help page doesn't include any such direction, only noting
in its documentation of the name argument that:
In the case of the ‘slot’ function, ‘name’ can be any
expression that evaluates to a valid slot in the class
definition. Generally, the only reason to use the functional
form rather than the simpler operator is _because_ the slot
name has to be computed.
Is there some other reason to prefer the functional form?
Josh
Finally, never use T/F for TRUE and FALSE, try:
T <- FALSE
and TRUE <- FALSE
and see the difference.
Terminally uninterested in winning points on SO,
Roger
--
View this message in context: http://r-sig-geo.2731867.n2.
nabble.com/Combining-polygons-and-calculating-their-area-i-
e-number-of-cells-tp7585395p7585401.html
Sent from the R-sig-geo mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
R-sig-Geo mailing list
R-sig-Geo@r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
--
Roger Bivand
Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics,
Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway.
voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 95 43
e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no
--
Roger Bivand
Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics,
Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway.
voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 95 43
e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no
_______________________________________________
R-sig-Geo mailing list
R-sig-Geo@r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
