Take a basic function
fun<-function(){
x<-c(1,2,3,4,5)
y<-c(1,2,3,4,5)
t<-x+y
return(t)
}
After I have run the function, is there a way I can access any of the variables created within the function. Either by specifying the variable- something like this:
fun$y
or
fun$t
or is there some way of asking R to save the variable within the function for use during my current R session (I'm not looking to save it permanently). AKA something along the lines of:
fun<-function(){
x<-c(1,2,3,4,5)
y<-c(1,2,3,4,5)
t<-x+y
Y<-save y for latter use
T<-save T for latter use
return(t)
}
Thanks!
You can't use a variable outside of its scope.
What you can do is use a list to return multiple values from your function.
Here's a good example.
Yes and no.
Yes, it is technically possible to make assignments to variables outside the scope of your function, so that they are accessible elsewhere. Typically this is done using either <<-, which assigns in the global environment if the variable being assigned can't be found, or calling assign and specifying an environment directly.
But...
No, you should probably not be doing this. R is a functional language, which means that it is intended to be used such that its functions do not create side-effects. If you violate this principle too much, you will inevitably run afoul of serious problems that will be difficult, if not impossible to debug.
If you create variables within a function that you will need later, it is considered best practice to return them all in a list, as Benito describes.
Related
This function is OK in R:
f <- function(x) {
x + y
}
Because if the variable y is not defined inside the function f(), R will look for it outside the environment of the function, in its parent environment.
Apart from the fact that this behavior can be a bug generator, what is the point of functions having input parameters? Anyway, all the variables inside a function can be searched outside of it.
Is there any way not to look for variables outside a function if they do not exist within the function?
Some reasons for using parameters that came to my mind:
Without parameters, users have to define variables before using the function, and these variable names need to match the variable names used within the function -- this is impractical.
How is anyone supposed to know/remember the names of the variables within a function? How do I know which variables within a function are purely local, and which variables have to exist outside of the function?
Input parameters can be passed directly as values or as a variable (and the variable name does not matter).
Input parameters communicate the intended usage of the function; it is clear what data is needed to operate it (or at the very least: how many values need to be inserted by the user of the function)
Input parameters can be documented properly using Rd files (or roxygen syntax)
I am sure there are many other reasons to use input parameters.
M. Papenberg provides a very good explanation.
Here's a quick addendum how to make a function not look for objects in parental environments:
Just provide them in the parameter list! This might sound stupid, but that's what you should always do unless you have good reason to do otherwise. In your example only x is passed to the function. So, if the idea here is that x should be returned if y doesn't exist, you can go for default parameters. In this case this could be done as
f <- function(x, y = 0) {
x + y
}
I'm working in R, and I'd like to define some variables that I (or one of my collaborators) cannot change. In C++ I'd do this:
const std::string path( "/projects/current" );
How do I do this in the R programming language?
Edit for clarity: I know that I can define strings like this in R:
path = "/projects/current"
What I really want is a language construct that guarantees that nobody can ever change the value associated with the variable named "path."
Edit to respond to comments:
It's technically true that const is a compile-time guarantee, but it would be valid in my mind that the R interpreter would throw stop execution with an error message. For example, look what happens when you try to assign values to a numeric constant:
> 7 = 3
Error in 7 = 3 : invalid (do_set) left-hand side to assignment
So what I really want is a language feature that allows you to assign values once and only once, and there should be some kind of error when you try to assign a new value to a variabled declared as const. I don't care if the error occurs at run-time, especially if there's no compilation phase. This might not technically be const by the Wikipedia definition, but it's very close. It also looks like this is not possible in the R programming language.
See lockBinding:
a <- 1
lockBinding("a", globalenv())
a <- 2
Error: cannot change value of locked binding for 'a'
Since you are planning to distribute your code to others, you could (should?) consider to create a package. Create within that package a NAMESPACE. There you can define variables that will have a constant value. At least to the functions that your package uses. Have a look at Tierney (2003) Name Space Management for R
I'm pretty sure that this isn't possible in R. If you're worried about accidentally re-writing the value then the easiest thing to do would be to put all of your constants into a list structure then you know when you're using those values. Something like:
my.consts<-list(pi=3.14159,e=2.718,c=3e8)
Then when you need to access them you have an aide memoir to know what not to do and also it pushes them out of your normal namespace.
Another place to ask would be R development mailing list. Hope this helps.
(Edited for new idea:) The bindenv functions provide an
experimental interface for adjustments to environments and bindings within environments. They allow for locking environments as well as individual bindings, and for linking a variable to a function.
This seems like the sort of thing that could give a false sense of security (like a const pointer to a non-const variable) but it might help.
(Edited for focus:) const is a compile-time guarantee, not a lock-down on bits in memory. Since R doesn't have a compile phase where it looks at all the code at once (it is built for interactive use), there's no way to check that future instructions won't violate any guarantee. If there's a right way to do this, the folks at the R-help list will know. My suggested workaround: fake your own compilation. Write a script to preprocess your R code that will manually substitute the corresponding literal for each appearance of your "constant" variables.
(Original:) What benefit are you hoping to get from having a variable that acts like a C "const"?
Since R has exclusively call-by-value semantics (unless you do some munging with environments), there isn't any reason to worry about clobbering your variables by calling functions on them. Adopting some sort of naming conventions or using some OOP structure is probably the right solution if you're worried about you and your collaborators accidentally using variables with the same names.
The feature you're looking for may exist, but I doubt it given the origin of R as a interactive environment where you'd want to be able to undo your actions.
R doesn't have a language constant feature. The list idea above is good; I personally use a naming convention like ALL_CAPS.
I took the answer below from this website
The simplest sort of R expression is just a constant value, typically a numeric value (a number) or a character value (a piece of text). For example, if we need to specify a number of seconds corresponding to 10 minutes, we specify a number.
> 600
[1] 600
If we need to specify the name of a file that we want to read data from, we specify the name as a character value. Character values must be surrounded by either double-quotes or single-quotes.
> "http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html"
[1] "http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html"
coming back to this post years later to add yet another warning: DONT DO THIS
I am trying to store a variable from a function in the global environment, but none of the solutions I found SO post or different SO post worked for me. This is an extremely simplified example to illustrate my problem. I cannot just use the <<- to make v global because my actual function creates several dozen variables.
Code (main_file.R)
source("function_me.R")
#environment(doGlobalThing) <-parent.frame(2) #didnt work
doGlobalThing()
v #cant get to this var from the global environment
Code (function_me.R)
doGlobalThing<-function(){
#eval(v<-'hi',env=parent.frame(2)) #tried this, didnt work
v<-'hi'
}
You could use assign:
assign("v","hi",envir = globalenv())
This requires that you have the name of the target global variable as a string, but it can be easy to do this even with a vector of dozens of such things.
This question discusses the differences between assign and <<-. The chief difference is that assign lets you specify the environment -- so it is easy to use it to store data in a non-global but persistent environment so that you could e.g. emulate static variables in R. While it is possible to use assign to modify the global environment, you should be aware that it is seldom a good thing to do so. There is too much of a danger of accidentally overwriting data that you don't want to have overwritten. Code which makes heavy use of global variables can almost always be refactored into cleaner code which doesn't. If you need to get a lot of heterogeneous data from a function to the calling environment, the cleanest solution would be to return the needed data in a list.
The accepted answer ends its discussion of <<- and assign with a good quote:
The Evil and Wrong use is to modify variables in the global
environment.
I have this function
ANN<-function (x,y){
DV<-rep(c(0:1),5)
X1<-c(1:10)
X2<-c(2:11)
ANN<-neuralnet(x~y,hidden=10,algorithm='rprop+')
return(ANN)
}
I need the function run like
formula=X1+X2
ANN(DV,formula)
and get result of the function. So the problem is to say the function USE the object which was created during the run of function. I need to run trough lapply more combinations of x,y, so I need it this way. Any advices how to achieve it? Thanks
I've edited my answer, this still works for me. Does it work for you? Can you be specific about what sort of errors you are getting?
New response:
ANN<-function (y){
X1<-c(1:10)
DV<-rep(c(0:1),5)
X2<-c(2:11)
dat <- data.frame(X1,X2)
ANN<-neuralnet(DV ~y,hidden=10,algorithm='rprop+',data=dat)
return(ANN)
}
formula<-X1+X2
ANN(formula)
If you want so specify the two parts of the formula separately, you should still pass them as formulas.
library(neuralnet)
ANN<-function (x,y){
DV<-rep(c(0:1),5)
X1<-c(1:10)
X2<-c(2:11)
formula<-update(x,y)
ANN<-neuralnet(formula,data=data.frame(DV,X1,X2),
hidden=10,algorithm='rprop+')
return(ANN)
}
ANN(DV~., ~X1+X2)
And assuming you're using neuralnet() from the neuralnet library, it seems the data= is required so you'll need to pass in a data.frame with those columns.
Formulas as special because they are not evaluated unless explicitly requested to do so. This is different than just using a symbol, where as soon as you use it is evaluated to something in the proper frame. This means there's a big difference between DV (a "name") and DV~. (a formula). The latter is safer for passing around to functions and evaluating in a different context. Things get much trickier with symbols/names.
I'm working in R, and I'd like to define some variables that I (or one of my collaborators) cannot change. In C++ I'd do this:
const std::string path( "/projects/current" );
How do I do this in the R programming language?
Edit for clarity: I know that I can define strings like this in R:
path = "/projects/current"
What I really want is a language construct that guarantees that nobody can ever change the value associated with the variable named "path."
Edit to respond to comments:
It's technically true that const is a compile-time guarantee, but it would be valid in my mind that the R interpreter would throw stop execution with an error message. For example, look what happens when you try to assign values to a numeric constant:
> 7 = 3
Error in 7 = 3 : invalid (do_set) left-hand side to assignment
So what I really want is a language feature that allows you to assign values once and only once, and there should be some kind of error when you try to assign a new value to a variabled declared as const. I don't care if the error occurs at run-time, especially if there's no compilation phase. This might not technically be const by the Wikipedia definition, but it's very close. It also looks like this is not possible in the R programming language.
See lockBinding:
a <- 1
lockBinding("a", globalenv())
a <- 2
Error: cannot change value of locked binding for 'a'
Since you are planning to distribute your code to others, you could (should?) consider to create a package. Create within that package a NAMESPACE. There you can define variables that will have a constant value. At least to the functions that your package uses. Have a look at Tierney (2003) Name Space Management for R
I'm pretty sure that this isn't possible in R. If you're worried about accidentally re-writing the value then the easiest thing to do would be to put all of your constants into a list structure then you know when you're using those values. Something like:
my.consts<-list(pi=3.14159,e=2.718,c=3e8)
Then when you need to access them you have an aide memoir to know what not to do and also it pushes them out of your normal namespace.
Another place to ask would be R development mailing list. Hope this helps.
(Edited for new idea:) The bindenv functions provide an
experimental interface for adjustments to environments and bindings within environments. They allow for locking environments as well as individual bindings, and for linking a variable to a function.
This seems like the sort of thing that could give a false sense of security (like a const pointer to a non-const variable) but it might help.
(Edited for focus:) const is a compile-time guarantee, not a lock-down on bits in memory. Since R doesn't have a compile phase where it looks at all the code at once (it is built for interactive use), there's no way to check that future instructions won't violate any guarantee. If there's a right way to do this, the folks at the R-help list will know. My suggested workaround: fake your own compilation. Write a script to preprocess your R code that will manually substitute the corresponding literal for each appearance of your "constant" variables.
(Original:) What benefit are you hoping to get from having a variable that acts like a C "const"?
Since R has exclusively call-by-value semantics (unless you do some munging with environments), there isn't any reason to worry about clobbering your variables by calling functions on them. Adopting some sort of naming conventions or using some OOP structure is probably the right solution if you're worried about you and your collaborators accidentally using variables with the same names.
The feature you're looking for may exist, but I doubt it given the origin of R as a interactive environment where you'd want to be able to undo your actions.
R doesn't have a language constant feature. The list idea above is good; I personally use a naming convention like ALL_CAPS.
I took the answer below from this website
The simplest sort of R expression is just a constant value, typically a numeric value (a number) or a character value (a piece of text). For example, if we need to specify a number of seconds corresponding to 10 minutes, we specify a number.
> 600
[1] 600
If we need to specify the name of a file that we want to read data from, we specify the name as a character value. Character values must be surrounded by either double-quotes or single-quotes.
> "http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html"
[1] "http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html"