<div dir="ltr">To clarify - that behavior is already implemented in merge (more specifically merge.data.table). I don't really have a view on having it in X[Y] as well - I don't like all.x and all.y as the names, since there are no params named 'x' and 'y' in [.data.table (as opposed to merge), but some param that would do a full outer join could certainly be added.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Gabor Grothendieck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ggrothendieck@gmail.com" target="_blank">ggrothendieck@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yes, sorry. Its nomatch= which presumably derives from the parameter<br>
of the same name in the match() function. If the idea of the nomatch=<br>
name was to leverage off existing argument names in R then I would<br>
prefer all.y= to be consistent with merge() in place of nomatch= since<br>
we are really merging/joining rather than just matching. That would<br>
also allow extension to all types of join by adding <a href="http://all.an" target="_blank">all.an</a> x= argument<br>
too.<br>
<br>
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Eduard Antonyan<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><<a href="mailto:eduard.antonyan@gmail.com">eduard.antonyan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I would prefer nomatch=0 as a default though, simply because that's what I<br>
> do most of the time :)<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Eduard Antonyan <<a href="mailto:eduard.antonyan@gmail.com">eduard.antonyan@gmail.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> A correction - the param is called "nomatch", not "match".<br>
>><br>
>> This use case seems like smth a user shouldn't really do - in an ideal<br>
>> world you should have them both keyed by the same-name column.<br>
>><br>
>> As is, my view on it is that data.table is correcting the user mistake of<br>
>> naming the column in Y - y, instead of x, and so the output makes sense and<br>
>> I don't see the need of complicating the behavior by adding more cases one<br>
>> has to go through to figure out what the output columns would be. Similar to<br>
>> asking for X[J(c("b", "c", "d"))] - you wouldn't want an anonymous column<br>
>> there, would you?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Gabor Grothendieck<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:ggrothendieck@gmail.com">ggrothendieck@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> I am moving this discussion which started with mdowle to the list.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Consider this example slightly modified from the data.table FAQ:<br>
>>><br>
>>> > X = data.table(x=c("a","a","b","b","b","c","c"), foo=1:7, key="x")<br>
>>> > Y = data.table(y=c("b","c","d"), bar=c(4,2,3))<br>
>>> > out <- X[Y]; out<br>
>>> x foo bar<br>
>>> 1: b 3 4<br>
>>> 2: b 4 4<br>
>>> 3: b 5 4<br>
>>> 4: c 6 2<br>
>>> 5: c 7 2<br>
>>> 6: d NA 3<br>
>>><br>
>>> Note that the first column of the output is labelled x even though the<br>
>>> data to produce it comes from y, e.g. "d" in out$x is not in X$x but<br>
>>> does appear in Y$y so clearly the data is coming from y as opposed to<br>
>>> x . In terms of SQL the above would be written:<br>
>>><br>
>>> select Y.y as x, ...<br>
>>><br>
>>> and the need to renamne the first column of out suggests that there<br>
>>> may be a deeper problem here.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Here are some ideas to address this (they would require changes to<br>
>>> data.table):<br>
>>><br>
>>> - the default of X[Y,, match=NA] would be changed to a default of<br>
>>> X[Y,,match=0] so that it corresponds to the defaults in R's merge and<br>
>>> in SQL joins.<br>
>>><br>
>>> - the column name of the first column in the example above would be<br>
>>> changed to y if match=0 but be left at x if match=NA. In the case<br>
>>> that match=0 (the proposed new default) x and y are equal so the first<br>
>>> column can be validly labelled as x but in the case that match=NA they<br>
>>> are not so y would be used as the column name.<br>
>>><br>
>>> - the name match= does seem a bit misleading since R's match only<br>
>>> matches one item in the target whereas in data.table match matches<br>
>>> many if mult="all" and that is the default. Perhaps some thought<br>
>>> should be given to a name change here?<br>
>>><br>
>>> The above would seem to correspond more closely to R's merge and SQL<br>
>>> join defaults. Any use cases or other comments?<br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>> Statistics & Software Consulting<br>
>>> GKX Group, GKX Associates Inc.<br>
>>> tel: 1-877-GKX-GROUP<br>
>>> email: ggrothendieck at <a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> datatable-help mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:datatable-help@lists.r-forge.r-project.org">datatable-help@lists.r-forge.r-project.org</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/datatable-help" target="_blank">https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/datatable-help</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Statistics & Software Consulting<br>
GKX Group, GKX Associates Inc.<br>
tel: 1-877-GKX-GROUP<br>
email: ggrothendieck at <a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>