Re: lapply( *, names) -- bug ?!

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: lapply( *, names) -- bug ?!
From: Martin Maechler (maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch)
Date: Fri 23 Jul 1999 - 17:44:12 EST


Message-Id: <199907230744.JAA05728@sophie.ethz.ch>

>>>>> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 08:28:35 +0100 (BST), Prof Brian D Ripley <ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk> said:

BDR> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Martin Maechler wrote:
>> This came on S-news
>>
>> The more direct test being
>>
>> sapply(c(a=1,b=2), names)
>>
>> Problem:
>> R ("all" versions)
>> behaves the same as S+5.1, which is wrong IMO.
>>
>> {since some might disagree, I didn't yet post to R-bugs ..}

BDR> I do. the argument is not a list, and lapply applies to lists.
that was not the point;
lapply() and sapply() are supposed to coerce to list()
BDR> So
>> as.list(c(a=1,b=2))
BDR> $a
BDR> [1] 1

BDR> $b
BDR> [1] 2

BDR> Fine. Note the names of the components are NULL.

Yes, exactly.

And therefore lapply(*, names) {or sapply(..)} should return NULLs
as it does [in R and S+5.x].
I was wrong all along.
It seems I need a longer warm-up time for my brain today...

Martin
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue 04 Jan 2000 - 14:16:06 EST