From J.C.Rougier@durham.ac.uk  Tue Jan  4 16:59:45 2000
From: J.C.Rougier@durham.ac.uk (Jonathan Rougier)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 16:59:45 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: set functions
In-Reply-To: <x2yaa5epzt.fsf@blueberry.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0001041656580.20724-100000@laplace>

On 4 Jan 2000, Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote:

> Watch:
> 
> > x<-1:50000
> > y<-x[order(runif(50000))]
> > "equiv2" <- function(x, y) all(c(match(x, y, 0)>0, match(y, x, 0)>0))
> > equiv<-function(x,y) 
> +     length(x<-unique(x))==length(y<-unique(y)) && 
> +     all(sort(x)==sort(y)) 
> > system.time(equiv2(x,y))
> [1] 3.10 0.02 3.00 0.00 0.00
> > system.time(equiv(x,y))
> [1] 0.77 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

Yup -- that's much quicker!  To re-ask the original question, would it be
reasonable to include such a function along with the other set functions?
Cheers, Jonathan.

Jonathan Rougier                       Science Laboratories
Department of Mathematical Sciences    South Road
University of Durham                   Durham DH1 3LE

"[B]egin upon the precept ... that the things we see are to be 
 weighed in the scale with what we know"  (Meredith, 1879, The Egoist)

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
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
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


set functions
Jonathan Rougier