Zeitpunkt Nutzer Delta Tröts TNR Titel Version maxTL So 28.07.2024 00:00:15 61.966 +3 3.586.611 57,9 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Sa 27.07.2024 00:00:14 61.963 +5 3.583.830 57,8 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Fr 26.07.2024 00:01:07 61.958 +1 3.580.868 57,8 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Do 25.07.2024 00:00:10 61.957 +1 3.577.506 57,7 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Mi 24.07.2024 00:01:07 61.956 0 3.574.077 57,7 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Di 23.07.2024 00:00:03 61.956 -3 3.570.705 57,6 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Mo 22.07.2024 00:01:10 61.959 +1 3.567.825 57,6 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 So 21.07.2024 00:01:07 61.958 +1 3.564.861 57,5 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Sa 20.07.2024 00:01:10 61.957 +1 3.561.604 57,5 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500 Fr 19.07.2024 13:57:34 61.956 0 3.558.474 57,4 Fosstodon 4.2.10 500
dgkf (@dgkf) · 06/2023 · Tröts: 189 · Folger: 98
So 28.07.2024 22:40
After something like 7 years of R, the thought only just crossed my mind that the “frame” in “data.frame” might be because of how R allows arbitrary environments to be introduced into the stack of evaluation frames.
By doing
with(mtcars, mpg / wt)
We are affecting our evaluation frame based on the mtcars data - a “data frame”
with() is less common these days, and it feels like we’ve grown away from that interpretation, but it’s super interesting to rethink data this way.
[Öffentlich] Antw.: 0 Wtrl.: 1 Fav.: 0 · via Mastodon for iOS