> From: Barry Rowlingson
>
> Jan T. Kim wrote:
>
> > Generally, I fully agree -- modular coding is good, not only in R.
> > However, with regard to execution time, modularisation that involves
> > passing of large amounts of data (100 x 1000 data frames etc.) can
> > cause problems.
>
> I've j
Jan T. Kim wrote:
Generally, I fully agree -- modular coding is good, not only in R.
However, with regard to execution time, modularisation that involves
passing of large amounts of data (100 x 1000 data frames etc.) can
cause problems.
I've just tried a few simple examples of throwing biggish (30
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 09:50:20AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
> > "BertG" == Berton Gunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > on Mon, 16 May 2005 15:20:01 -0700 writes:
>
> BertG> (just my additional $.02) ... and as a general rule
> BertG> (subject to numerous exceptions, caveats, etc
ox
>> -Original Message- From:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>> Duncan Murdoch Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 3:09 PM To:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: r-help Subject: Re: [R]
>> parsing speed
>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Duncan Murdoch
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 3:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: r-help
> Subject: Re: [R] parsing speed
>
> Federico Calboli wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I have a question on parsing speed.
> &g
Federico Calboli wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have a question on parsing speed.
I have two functions:
F1
F2
As things are now, F2 calls F1 internally:
F2 = function(x){
if (something == 1){
y = F1(x)
}
if (something ==2){
do whatever
}
}
*Assuming there could be some difference*, is is faster to use the
