Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
In R devel r72789, the added part in 'factor' documentation (factor.Rd) is the following. Undocumentedly for a long time, \code{factor(x)} loses all \code{\link{attributes}(x)} but \code{"names"}, and resets \code{"levels"} and \code{"class"}. In the code of function 'factor', names(x) is copied to the result. As I mentioned before, names(x) is _not_ "names" attribute of 'x' when 'x' is a "POSIXlt" object. In R devel r72789, factor(x) is successful when 'x' is a "POSIXlt" object. I think, it is better to accurately state what the code does, maybe like this. Undocumentedly for a long time, \code{factor(x)} loses all \code{\link{attributes}(x)}, but has a copy of \code{\link{names}(x)}. Attributes "levels" and "class" are already documented right before the statement. To be more balanced, I am pointing out that, currently, levels replacement of a factor ('levels<-.factor') keeps attributes. My previous statement about "contrasts" attribute also holds there. By replacing levels, number of levels can change and, consequently, the original contrasts matrix is no longer valid. It can be argued that 'levels<-.factor' doesn't know "contrasts" attribute, as function 'contrasts' is in package stats, different from 'levels<-.factor' that is in package base. However, factor subsetting ('[.factor') knows "contrasts" attribute. -------------------- On Sat, 10/6/17, Martin Maechler <maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…) To: "R Development" <R-devel@r-project.org> Cc: "Serge Bibauw" <sbib...@gmail.com>, "Suharto Anggono" >>>> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel >>>>> on Thu, 8 Jun 2017 16:43:48 + writes: > * Be careful with "contrasts" attribute. If the number of levels is reduced, the original contrasts matrix is no longer valid. > Example case: > x <- factor(c("a", "a", "b", "b", "b"), levels = c("a", "b", "c")) > contrasts(x) <- contr.treatment(levels(x), contrasts=FALSE)[, -2, drop=FALSE] > droplevels(x) > * If function 'factor' is changed, make sure that as.factor(x) and factor(x) is the same for 'x' where is.integer(x) is TRUE. Currently, as.factor() is treated specially. > * It is possible that names(x) is not attr(x, "names"). For example, 'x' is a "POSIXlt" object. > Look at this example, which works in R 3.3.2. > x <- as.POSIXlt("2017-01-01", tz="UTC") > factor(x, levels=x) > By the way, in NEWS, in "CHANGES IN R 3.4.0", in "SIGNIFICANT USER-VISIBLE CHANGES", there is "factor() now uses order() to sort its levels". It is false. Code of function 'factor' in R 3.4.0 (https://svn.r-project.org/R/tags/R-3-4-0/src/library/base/R/factor.R) still uses 'sort.list', not 'order'. > >>>>> Martin Maechler >>>>> on Tue, 16 May 2017 11:01:23 +0200 writes: >>>>> Serge Bibauw >>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: >>> Hi, >>> Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I >>> don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all >>> object’s attributes. >> Yes. The help page for droplevels (or the simple >> definition of 'droplevels.factor') clearly indicate that >> the method for factors is really just a call to factor(x, >> exclude = *) >> and that _is_ quite an important base function whose >> semantic should not be changed lightly. Still, let's >> continue : >> Looking a bit, I see that the current behavior of factor() >> {and hence droplevels} has been unchanged in this respect >> for the whole history of R, well, at least for more than >> 17 years (R 1.0.1, April 2000). >> I'd agree there _is_ a bug, at least in the documentation >> which does *not* mention that currently, all attributes >> are dropped but "names", "levels" (and "class"). >> OTOH, factor() would only need a small change to make it >> preserve all attributes (but "class" and "levels" which >> are set explicitly). >> I'm sure this will break some checks in some packages. Is >> it worth it? >> e.g., our own R QC checks currently check (the printing of) the >> following (in tests/reg-tests-2.R ): >> > ## some te
Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel> on Thu, 8 Jun 2017 16:43:48 + writes: > * Be careful with "contrasts" attribute. If the number of levels is reduced, the original contrasts matrix is no longer valid. > Example case: > x <- factor(c("a", "a", "b", "b", "b"), levels = c("a", "b", "c")) > contrasts(x) <- contr.treatment(levels(x), contrasts=FALSE)[, -2, drop=FALSE] > droplevels(x) > * If function 'factor' is changed, make sure that as.factor(x) and factor(x) is the same for 'x' where is.integer(x) is TRUE. Currently, as.factor() is treated specially. > * It is possible that names(x) is not attr(x, "names"). For example, 'x' is a "POSIXlt" object. > Look at this example, which works in R 3.3.2. > x <- as.POSIXlt("2017-01-01", tz="UTC") > factor(x, levels=x) > By the way, in NEWS, in "CHANGES IN R 3.4.0", in "SIGNIFICANT USER-VISIBLE CHANGES", there is "factor() now uses order() to sort its levels". It is false. Code of function 'factor' in R 3.4.0 (https://svn.r-project.org/R/tags/R-3-4-0/src/library/base/R/factor.R) still uses 'sort.list', not 'order'. > > Martin Maechler > on Tue, 16 May 2017 11:01:23 +0200 writes: > Serge Bibauw > on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: >>> Hi, >>> Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I >>> don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all >>> object’s attributes. >> Yes. The help page for droplevels (or the simple >> definition of 'droplevels.factor') clearly indicate that >> the method for factors is really just a call to factor(x, >> exclude = *) >> and that _is_ quite an important base function whose >> semantic should not be changed lightly. Still, let's >> continue : >> Looking a bit, I see that the current behavior of factor() >> {and hence droplevels} has been unchanged in this respect >> for the whole history of R, well, at least for more than >> 17 years (R 1.0.1, April 2000). >> I'd agree there _is_ a bug, at least in the documentation >> which does *not* mention that currently, all attributes >> are dropped but "names", "levels" (and "class"). >> OTOH, factor() would only need a small change to make it >> preserve all attributes (but "class" and "levels" which >> are set explicitly). >> I'm sure this will break some checks in some packages. Is >> it worth it? >> e.g., our own R QC checks currently check (the printing of) the >> following (in tests/reg-tests-2.R ): >> > ## some tests of factor matrices >> > A <- factor(7:12) >> > dim(A) <- c(2, 3) >> > A >> [,1] [,2] [,3] >> [1,] 7911 >> [2,] 810 12 >> Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 >> > str(A) >> factor [1:2, 1:3] 7 8 9 10 ... >> - attr(*, "levels")= chr [1:6] "7" "8" "9" "10" ... >> > A[, 1:2] >> [,1] [,2] >> [1,] 79 >> [2,] 810 >> Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 >> > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] >> [1] 7 8 9 10 >> Levels: 7 8 9 10 >> >> with the proposed change to factor(), >> the last call would change its result: >> >> > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] >> [,1] [,2] >> [1,] 79 >> [2,] 810 >> Levels: 7 8 9 10 >> because 'drop=TRUE' calls factor(..) and that would also >> preserve the "dim" attribute. I would think that the >> changed behavior _is_ better, and is also according to >> documentation, because the help page for [.factor explains >> that 'drop = TRUE' drops levels, but _not_ that it >> transforms a factor matrix into a factor (vector). >> Martin > I'm finally coming back to this. > It still seems to make sense to change factor() and hence > droplevels() behavior here, and plan to commit this change > within a day. I had committed these (including regression checks and *.Rd changes) as svn rev 72771 to R-devel.. As Suharto also warned, this change had more severe effects in package space than I expected. Notably the fact that the "dim" attribute was kept there, lead to several errors in CRAN packages / their checks. Of course, I could have patched the change by explicitely *not* keeping certain attributes such as "dim" and "contrasts". But I've decided that in this case it seems more rational, notably for back compatibility reasons, to keep factor()'s and hence droplevel()'s behaviour and rather document it. So the "bug" is solved differently, by documenting the behavior that has been in place "forever". With svn's 72773, we are back to the previous state with the addition of mentioning in help(factor) that attributes are "lost". Martin Maechler ETH Zurich __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
* Be careful with "contrasts" attribute. If the number of levels is reduced, the original contrasts matrix is no longer valid. Example case: x <- factor(c("a", "a", "b", "b", "b"), levels = c("a", "b", "c")) contrasts(x) <- contr.treatment(levels(x), contrasts=FALSE)[, -2, drop=FALSE] droplevels(x) * If function 'factor' is changed, make sure that as.factor(x) and factor(x) is the same for 'x' where is.integer(x) is TRUE. Currently, as.factor() is treated specially. * It is possible that names(x) is not attr(x, "names"). For example, 'x' is a "POSIXlt" object. Look at this example, which works in R 3.3.2. x <- as.POSIXlt("2017-01-01", tz="UTC") factor(x, levels=x) By the way, in NEWS, in "CHANGES IN R 3.4.0", in "SIGNIFICANT USER-VISIBLE CHANGES", there is "factor() now uses order() to sort its levels". It is false. Code of function 'factor' in R 3.4.0 (https://svn.r-project.org/R/tags/R-3-4-0/src/library/base/R/factor.R) still uses 'sort.list', not 'order'. > Martin Maechler > on Tue, 16 May 2017 11:01:23 +0200 writes: > Serge Bibauw > on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: >> Hi, >> Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I >> don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all >> object’s attributes. > Yes. The help page for droplevels (or the simple > definition of 'droplevels.factor') clearly indicate that > the method for factors is really just a call to factor(x, > exclude = *) > and that _is_ quite an important base function whose > semantic should not be changed lightly. Still, let's > continue : > Looking a bit, I see that the current behavior of factor() > {and hence droplevels} has been unchanged in this respect > for the whole history of R, well, at least for more than > 17 years (R 1.0.1, April 2000). > I'd agree there _is_ a bug, at least in the documentation > which does *not* mention that currently, all attributes > are dropped but "names", "levels" (and "class"). > OTOH, factor() would only need a small change to make it > preserve all attributes (but "class" and "levels" which > are set explicitly). > I'm sure this will break some checks in some packages. Is > it worth it? > e.g., our own R QC checks currently check (the printing of) the > following (in tests/reg-tests-2.R ): > > ## some tests of factor matrices > > A <- factor(7:12) > > dim(A) <- c(2, 3) > > A >[,1] [,2] [,3] > [1,] 7911 > [2,] 810 12 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > > str(A) >factor [1:2, 1:3] 7 8 9 10 ... >- attr(*, "levels")= chr [1:6] "7" "8" "9" "10" ... > > A[, 1:2] >[,1] [,2] > [1,] 79 > [2,] 810 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] > [1] 7 8 9 10 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 > > with the proposed change to factor(), > the last call would change its result: > > > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] >[,1] [,2] > [1,] 79 > [2,] 810 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 > because 'drop=TRUE' calls factor(..) and that would also > preserve the "dim" attribute. I would think that the > changed behavior _is_ better, and is also according to > documentation, because the help page for [.factor explains > that 'drop = TRUE' drops levels, but _not_ that it > transforms a factor matrix into a factor (vector). > Martin I'm finally coming back to this. It still seems to make sense to change factor() and hence droplevels() behavior here, and plan to commit this change within a day. Martin Maechler ETH Zurich __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
> Martin Maechler> on Tue, 16 May 2017 11:01:23 +0200 writes: > Serge Bibauw > on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: >> Hi, >> Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I >> don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all >> object’s attributes. > Yes. The help page for droplevels (or the simple > definition of 'droplevels.factor') clearly indicate that > the method for factors is really just a call to factor(x, > exclude = *) > and that _is_ quite an important base function whose > semantic should not be changed lightly. Still, let's > continue : > Looking a bit, I see that the current behavior of factor() > {and hence droplevels} has been unchanged in this respect > for the whole history of R, well, at least for more than > 17 years (R 1.0.1, April 2000). > I'd agree there _is_ a bug, at least in the documentation > which does *not* mention that currently, all attributes > are dropped but "names", "levels" (and "class"). > OTOH, factor() would only need a small change to make it > preserve all attributes (but "class" and "levels" which > are set explicitly). > I'm sure this will break some checks in some packages. Is > it worth it? > e.g., our own R QC checks currently check (the printing of) the > following (in tests/reg-tests-2.R ): > > ## some tests of factor matrices > > A <- factor(7:12) > > dim(A) <- c(2, 3) > > A >[,1] [,2] [,3] > [1,] 7911 > [2,] 810 12 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > > str(A) >factor [1:2, 1:3] 7 8 9 10 ... >- attr(*, "levels")= chr [1:6] "7" "8" "9" "10" ... > > A[, 1:2] >[,1] [,2] > [1,] 79 > [2,] 810 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] > [1] 7 8 9 10 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 > > with the proposed change to factor(), > the last call would change its result: > > > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] >[,1] [,2] > [1,] 79 > [2,] 810 > Levels: 7 8 9 10 > because 'drop=TRUE' calls factor(..) and that would also > preserve the "dim" attribute. I would think that the > changed behavior _is_ better, and is also according to > documentation, because the help page for [.factor explains > that 'drop = TRUE' drops levels, but _not_ that it > transforms a factor matrix into a factor (vector). > Martin I'm finally coming back to this. It still seems to make sense to change factor() and hence droplevels() behavior here, and plan to commit this change within a day. Martin Maechler ETH Zurich __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
> Serge Bibauw> on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: > Hi, > Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all object’s attributes. Yes. The help page for droplevels (or the simple definition of 'droplevels.factor') clearly indicate that the method for factors is really just a call to factor(x, exclude = *) and that _is_ quite an important base function whose semantic should not be changed lightly. Still, let's continue : Looking a bit, I see that the current behavior of factor() {and hence droplevels} has been unchanged in this respect for the whole history of R, well, at least for more than 17 years (R 1.0.1, April 2000). I'd agree there _is_ a bug, at least in the documentation which does *not* mention that currently, all attributes are dropped but "names", "levels" (and "class"). OTOH, factor() would only need a small change to make it preserve all attributes (but "class" and "levels" which are set explicitly). I'm sure this will break some checks in some packages. Is it worth it? e.g., our own R QC checks currently check (the printing of) the following (in tests/reg-tests-2.R ): > ## some tests of factor matrices > A <- factor(7:12) > dim(A) <- c(2, 3) > A [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 7911 [2,] 810 12 Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > str(A) factor [1:2, 1:3] 7 8 9 10 ... - attr(*, "levels")= chr [1:6] "7" "8" "9" "10" ... > A[, 1:2] [,1] [,2] [1,] 79 [2,] 810 Levels: 7 8 9 10 11 12 > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] [1] 7 8 9 10 Levels: 7 8 9 10 with the proposed change to factor(), the last call would change its result: > A[, 1:2, drop=TRUE] [,1] [,2] [1,] 79 [2,] 810 Levels: 7 8 9 10 because 'drop=TRUE' calls factor(..) and that would also preserve the "dim" attribute. I would think that the changed behavior _is_ better, and is also according to documentation, because the help page for [.factor explains that 'drop = TRUE' drops levels, but _not_ that it transforms a factor matrix into a factor (vector). Martin > Example: >> > test <- c("hello", "something", "hi") >> > test <- factor(test) >> > comment(test) <- "this is a test" >> > attr(test, "description") <- "this is another test" >> > attributes(test) >> $levels >> [1] "hello" "hi" "something" >> >> $class >> [1] "factor" >> >> $comment >> [1] "this is a test" >> >> $description >> [1] "this is another test" >> >> > test <- droplevels(test) >> > attributes(test) >> $levels >> [1] "hello" "hi" "something" >> >> $class >> [1] "factor" > Serge __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
Hi, Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I don’t think that is intended: droplevels() also drops all object’s attributes. Example: > > test <- c("hello", "something", "hi") > > test <- factor(test) > > comment(test) <- "this is a test" > > attr(test, "description") <- "this is another test" > > attributes(test) > $levels > [1] "hello" "hi" "something" > > $class > [1] "factor" > > $comment > [1] "this is a test" > > $description > [1] "this is another test" > > > test <- droplevels(test) > > attributes(test) > $levels > [1] "hello" "hi" "something" > > $class > [1] "factor" Serge [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel