Rolf Turner wrote: >> 'ppp' objects used by 'spatstat' have an annoying structure > > <SNIP> > > Annoyance is in the mind of the beholder I think. Personally I > find the structure of ppp objects absolutely *delightful*! :-) > > Also, they are simple, intuitive, easy to work with, and easy to > understand, take apart, dissect, and manipulate. Furthermore the > tools in spatstat make it easy to do unto ppp objects pretty well > anything one might want to do to a point pattern. (I'm not being > immodest here; the tools are mainly down to Adrian.) > > Just what do you find ``annoying'' about the structure of ppp objects?
Well, I guess only the fact that they’re not ‘sp’ objects, really. And that’s very annoying … :) And though the ‘window’ element of ‘ppp’ objects may be of use to some people, I haven’t had any use for it. The annoying thing here is that the constructor doesn’t generate the window automatically, based on the extent / bounding box of the data, and don’t have an *option* for doing this, either. Whenever I have used ‘spatstat’ (not too often), I have had to spend too much time looking up how the window should be specified. Having [0,1] × [0,1] as the *default* window, and excluding any points outside this does seems like a strange design decision. -- Karl Ove Hufthammer _______________________________________________ R-sig-Geo mailing list R-sig-Geo@stat.math.ethz.ch https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo