[Rd] Unneeded if statements in RealFromComplex C code
Hi,
I just stumbled across these 2 lines in RealFromComplex (lines 208 & 209
in src/main/coerce.c):
double attribute_hidden
RealFromComplex(Rcomplex x, int *warn)
{
if (ISNAN(x.r) || ISNAN(x.i))
return NA_REAL;
if (ISNAN(x.r)) return x.r;
<- line 208
if (ISNAN(x.i)) return NA_REAL;
<- line 209
if (x.i != 0)
*warn |= WARN_IMAG;
return x.r;
}
They were added in 2015 (revision 69410).
They don't serve any purpose and might slow things down a little (unless
compiler optimization is able to ignore them). In any case they should
probably be removed.
Cheers,
H.
--
Hervé Pagès
Bioconductor Core Team
hpages.on.git...@gmail.com
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Should Position() use match.fun()?
> Kurt Hornik writes:
> Steve Martin writes:
>> Hello,
>> All of the funprog functions except Position() use match.fun() early
>> in the body of the function. (Filter() seems to rely on lapply() for
>> this, but the effect is the same.)
> Right.
>> In most cases this isn't a problem, but I can't see why Position()
>> shouldn't look something like
>> Position2 <- function(f, x, right = FALSE, nomatch = NA_integer_) {
>> f <- match.fun(f) # the only difference from Position()
>> ind <- if (right) rev(seq_along(x)) else seq_along(x)
>> for (i in ind) {
>> if (f(x[[i]])) return(i)
>> }
>> nomatch
>> }
>> This would make it consistent with the other funprog functions, and
>> would mean that Find() and Position() give the same result when
>> expected
> Indeed. I'll look into adding the match.fun ...
Changed now with c80873.
Best
-k
> Best
> -k
>>> equals3 <- function(x) x == 3
>>> Position("equals3", 1:5)
>> Error in f(x[[i]]) : could not find function "f"
>>> Position2("equals3", 1:5)
>> [1] 3
>>> Find("equals3", 1:5)
>> [1] 3
>> Thanks,
>> Steve
>> __
>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Should Position() use match.fun()?
> Steve Martin writes:
> Hello,
> All of the funprog functions except Position() use match.fun() early
> in the body of the function. (Filter() seems to rely on lapply() for
> this, but the effect is the same.)
Right.
> In most cases this isn't a problem, but I can't see why Position()
> shouldn't look something like
> Position2 <- function(f, x, right = FALSE, nomatch = NA_integer_) {
> f <- match.fun(f) # the only difference from Position()
> ind <- if (right) rev(seq_along(x)) else seq_along(x)
> for (i in ind) {
> if (f(x[[i]])) return(i)
> }
> nomatch
> }
> This would make it consistent with the other funprog functions, and
> would mean that Find() and Position() give the same result when
> expected
Indeed. I'll look into adding the match.fun ...
Best
-k
>> equals3 <- function(x) x == 3
>> Position("equals3", 1:5)
> Error in f(x[[i]]) : could not find function "f"
>> Position2("equals3", 1:5)
> [1] 3
>> Find("equals3", 1:5)
> [1] 3
> Thanks,
> Steve
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
