Using ifelse to change column names in R [duplicate] - r

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?

The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.

I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4

Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4

use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3

yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.

Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)

Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2

In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2

Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

Related

Why ifelse or if_else doesn't work as expected in purrr::accumulate [duplicate]

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?
The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.
I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4
Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4
use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3
yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.
Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)
Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2
In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2
Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

Why ifelse is not the same as if statement? [duplicate]

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?
The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.
I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4
Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4
use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3
yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.
Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)
Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2
In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2
Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

ifelse conditional assignent of tibbles [duplicate]

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?
The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.
I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4
Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4
use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3
yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.
Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)
Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2
In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2
Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

How to use if_else with sql query in RODBC package R [duplicate]

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?
The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.
I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4
Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4
use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3
yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.
Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)
Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2
In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2
Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

Why can't R's ifelse statements return vectors?

I've found R's ifelse statements to be pretty handy from time to time. For example:
ifelse(TRUE,1,2)
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,1,2)
# [1] 2
But I'm somewhat confused by the following behavior.
ifelse(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 1
ifelse(FALSE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
# [1] 3
Is this a design choice that's above my paygrade?
The documentation for ifelse states:
ifelse returns a value with the same
shape as test which is filled with
elements selected from either yes or
no depending on whether the element
of test is TRUE or FALSE.
Since you are passing test values of length 1, you are getting results of length 1. If you pass longer test vectors, you will get longer results:
> ifelse(c(TRUE, FALSE), c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
[1] 1 4
So ifelse is intended for the specific purpose of testing a vector of booleans and returning a vector of the same length, filled with elements taken from the (vector) yes and no arguments.
It is a common confusion, because of the function's name, to use this when really you want just a normal if () {} else {} construction instead.
I bet you want a simple if statement instead of ifelse - in R, if isn't just a control-flow structure, it can return a value:
> if(TRUE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 1 2
> if(FALSE) c(1,2) else c(3,4)
[1] 3 4
Note that you can circumvent the problem if you assign the result inside the ifelse:
ifelse(TRUE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 1 2
ifelse(FALSE, a <- c(1,2), a <- c(3,4))
a
# [1] 3 4
use `if`, e.g.
> `if`(T,1:3,2:4)
[1] 1 2 3
yeah, I think ifelse() is really designed for when you have a big long vector of tests and want to map each to one of two options. For example, I often do colors for plot() in this way:
plot(x,y, col = ifelse(x>2, 'red', 'blue'))
If you had a big long vector of tests but wanted pairs for outputs, you could use sapply() or plyr's llply() or something, perhaps.
Sometimes the user just needs a switch statement instead of an ifelse. In that case:
condition <- TRUE
switch(2-condition, c(1, 2), c(3, 4))
#### [1] 1 2
(which is another syntax option of Ken Williams's answer)
Here is an approach similar to that suggested by Cath, but it can work with existing pre-assigned vectors
It is based around using the get() like so:
a <- c(1,2)
b <- c(3,4)
get(ifelse(TRUE, "a", "b"))
# [1] 1 2
In your case, using if_else from dplyr would have been helpful: if_else is more strict than ifelse, and throws an error for your case:
library(dplyr)
if_else(TRUE,c(1,2),c(3,4))
#> `true` must be length 1 (length of `condition`), not 2
Found on everydropr:
ifelse(rep(TRUE, length(c(1,2))), c(1,2),c(3,4))
#>[1] 1 2
Can replicate the result of your condition to return the desired length

Resources