[Rd] [.raster bug {was "str() on raster objects fails .."}
Martin Maechler
maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch
Tue Feb 1 09:22:03 CET 2011
>>>>> Henrik Bengtsson <hb at biostat.ucsf.edu>
>>>>> on Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:16:59 -0800 writes:
> Hi, str() on raster objects fails for certain dimensions. For
> example:
>> str(as.raster(0, nrow=1, ncol=100)) 'raster' chr [1, 1:100]
> "#000000" "#000000" "#000000" "#000000" ...
>> str(as.raster(0, nrow=1, ncol=101)) Error in `[.raster`(object,
> seq_len(max.len)) : subscript out of bounds
> This seems to do with how str() and "[.raster"() is coded; when
> subsetting as a vector, which str() relies on, "[.raster"()
> still returns a matrix-like object, e.g.
>> img <- as.raster(1:25, max=25, nrow=5, ncol=5);
>> img[1:2]
> [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5]
> [1,] "#0A0A0A" "#3D3D3D" "#707070" "#A3A3A3" "#D6D6D6"
> [2,] "#141414" "#474747" "#7A7A7A" "#ADADAD" "#E0E0E0"
> compare with:
>> as.matrix(img)[1:2]
> [1] "#0A0A0A" "#3D3D3D"
> The easy but incomplete fix is to do:
> str.raster <- function(object, ...) {
> str(as.matrix(object), ...);
> }
> Other suggestions?
The informal "raster" class is behaving ``illogical''
in the following sense:
> r <- as.raster(0, nrow=1, ncol=11)
> r[seq_along(r)]
Error in `[.raster`(r, seq_along(r)) : subscript out of bounds
or, here equivalently,
> r[1:length(r)]
Error in `[.raster`(r, 1:length(r)) : subscript out of bounds
When classes do behave in such a way, they definitely need their
own str() method.
However, the bug really is in "[.raster":
Currently, r[i] is equivalent to r[i,] which is not at all
matrix-like and its help clearly says that subsetting should
work as for matrices.
A recent thread on R-help/R-devel has mentioned the fact that
"[" methods for matrix-like methods need to use both nargs() and
missing() and that "[.dataframe" has been the example to follow
"forever", IIRC already in S and S-plus as of 20 years ago.
Thank you, Henrik, for the bug report.
Martin
More information about the R-devel
mailing list