Can sort_unique() pass along the decreasing argument to sort()?
#950
Comments
|
Yes, looks like an oversight we can fix. Maybe wait a day or three before PRing as I am trying to get 1.0.1 out of the door but I am seriously short of resources for the rev.dep. So patience is a virtue. |
|
Sure, I put it on my calendar to work on a week from now. I'll be out a bit next week. Thanks |
eddelbuettel
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 23, 2019
* Added decreasing parameter to sort_unique() to address #950. * Allow the travis build to run for 20 minutes. * Travis wait doesn't play nicely with docker without a workaround. c.f. travis-ci/travis-ci#6934 (comment) * Add type... * Use `na.last = FALSE` to disable changing orders. Note: `unique()`'s unit test use `na.last = TRUE` because sorting was done at the R level instead of the C++ level. * Remove travis debug setup and enable only one `na.last`
|
Closed in #958 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
It looks like
sort_unique()is simplyunique(x).sort(), as shown here. Would it be possible to expose thedecreasingargument ofsort()tosort_unique()? I can call both separately to do this, but it seems useful to wrap the pattern completely.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: