[R] Removing
David Winsemius
dwinsemius at comcast.net
Thu Mar 12 20:02:09 CET 2009
True, I suppose. The specification from Ma could have been more
explicit. Should she want to only have duplicates in sequence, then
perhaps the use of construction within the rle function would be useful.
act2[ act2$Rep[-1] != act2$Rep[-length(act2$Rep)], ]
Date Dtime Hour Min Second Rep
51 2006-02-22 14:52:18 14 52 18 useractivity_act
57 2006-02-22 14:52:51 14 52 51 4
58 2006-02-22 14:52:52 14 52 52 3
60 2006-02-22 14:54:42 14 54 42 useractivity_idle
Which turns out on examination to be isomorphic to Gabor's earlier
efforts.
--
David Winsemius
On Mar 12, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Patrick Burns wrote:
> Simpler, but maybe wrong. Not duplicated
> was my first response as well, but then I began
> wondering if the question implied globally
> duplicated or duplicated within subgroups.
>
>
> Patrick Burns
> patrick at burns-stat.com
> +44 (0)20 8525 0696
> http://www.burns-stat.com
> (home of "The R Inferno" and "A Guide for the Unwilling S User")
>
> David Winsemius wrote:
>> Much simpler would be:
>>
>> act2[!duplicated(act2$Rep),] #use the negation of the duplicated
>> function on $Rep and indexing
>>
>> Date Dtime Hour Min Second Rep
>> 51 2006-02-22 14:52:18 14 52 18 useractivity_act
>> 52 2006-02-22 14:52:18 14 52 18 4
>> 58 2006-02-22 14:52:52 14 52 52 3
>> 60 2006-02-22 14:54:42 14 54 42 useractivity_idle
>>
>> Cannot reproduce the blank line though.
David Winsemius, MD
Heritage Laboratories
West Hartford, CT
More information about the R-help
mailing list