alike
is similar to all.equal
from base R except it only compares object structure. As with all.equal
, the first argument (target
) must be matched by the second (current
).
library(vetr)
alike(integer(5), 1:5) # different values, but same structure
[1] TRUE
alike(integer(5), 1:4) # wrong size
[1] "`length(1:4)` should be 5 (is 4)"
alike(integer(26), letters) # same size, but different types
[1] "`letters` should be type \"integer-like\" (is \"character\")"
alike
only compares structural elements that are defined in target
(a.k.a. the template). This allows “wildcard” templates. For example, we consider length zero vectors to have undefined length so those match vectors of any length:
alike(integer(), 1:5)
[1] TRUE
alike(integer(), 1:4)
[1] TRUE
alike(integer(), letters) # type is still defined and must match
[1] "`letters` should be type \"integer-like\" (is \"character\")"
Similarly, if a template does not specify an attribute, objects with any value for that attribute will match:
alike(list(), data.frame()) # a data frame is a list with a attributes
[1] TRUE
alike(data.frame(), list()) # but a list does not have the data.frame attributes
[1] "`list()` should be class \"data.frame\" (is \"list\")"
As an extension to the wildcard concept, we interpret partially specified core R attributes. Here we allow any three column integer matrix to match:
<- matrix(integer(), ncol=3) # partially specified matrix
mx.tpl alike(mx.tpl, matrix(sample(1:12), nrow=4)) # any number of rows match
[1] TRUE
alike(mx.tpl, matrix(sample(1:12), nrow=3)) # but column count must match
[1] "`matrix(sample(1:12), nrow = 3)` should have 3 columns (has 4)"
or a data frame of arbitrary number of rows, but same column structure as iris
:
<- iris[0, ] # no rows, but structure is defined
iris.tpl alike(iris.tpl, iris[1:10, ]) # any number of rows match
[1] TRUE
alike(iris.tpl, CO2) # but column structure must match
[1] "`names(CO2)[1]` should be \"Sepal.Length\" (is \"Plant\")"
“alikeness” is complex to describe, but should be intuitive to grasp. We recommend you look example(alike)
to get a sense of “alikeness”. If you want to understand the specifics, read on.
alike
’s template based comparison is declarative. You declare what structure an object is expected to implement, and vetr
infers all the computations required to verify that is so. This makes is particularly well suited for enforcing structural requirements for S3 objects. The S4 system does this and more, but S3 objects are still used extensively in R code, and sometimes S4 classes are not appropriate.
There are several advantages to template based comparisons:
The template concept was inspired by vapply
.
alike
compares objects on type, length, and attributes. Recursive structures are compared element by element. Language objects and functions are compared specially because the concept of a value within those is more complex (e.g., is the +
in x + y
just a value?).
We will defer discussion of attribute comparison to the attributes section.
Objects must be the same length to be alike
, unless the template (target
) is zero length, in which case the object may be any length. Environments are an exception: we only require that all the elements present in target
be present in current
. Also, note that calls to (
are ignored in language objects, which may affect length computation.
Type comparison is done on type (i.e. the typeof
) with some adjustments to better align comparisons to “percieved” types as opposed to internal storage types.
We allow integer vectors to be considered numeric, and short integer-like numerics to be treated as integers:
alike(1L, 1) # `1` is not technically integer, but we treat it as such
[1] TRUE
alike(1L, 1.1) # 1.1 is not integer-like
[1] "`1.1` should be type \"integer-like\" (is \"double\")"
alike(1.1, 1L) # integers can match numerics
[1] TRUE
This feature is designed to simplify checks for integer-like numbers. The following two expressions are roughly equivalent:
stopifnot(length(x) == 1L && (is.integer(x) || is.numeric(x) && floor(x) == x))
stopifnot(alike(integer(1L), x))
Note that we only check numerics of length <= 100 for integerness to avoid full scans on large vectors. We expect that the primary source of these integer-like numerics is hand input vectors (e.g. c(1, 2, 3)
), so hopefully this compromise is not too limiting. You can modify the threshold length for this treatment via the fuzzy.int.max.len
parameter to the settings
objects (see ?vetr_settings
).
Closures, builtins, and specials are all treated as a single type, even though internally they are stored as different types.
alike
will recurse through lists (and by extension data frames), pairlists, expressions, and environments and will check pairwise alikeness between the corresponding elements of the target
and current
objects.
Environments have slightly different comparison rules in two respects:
current
may have additional itemscurrent
must be too (this is because the global environment is often littered with many objects, and explicitly comparing it to another environment could be computationally expensive)NULL
elements within templates in recursive objects are considered undefined and as such act like wildcards:
## two NULLs match two length list
alike(list(NULL, NULL), list(1:10, letters))
[1] TRUE
## but not three length list
alike(list(NULL, NULL), list(1:10, letters, iris))
[1] "`length(list(1:10, letters, iris))` should be 2 (is 3)"
Note that top level NULL
s do not act as wildcards:
alike(NULL, 1:10) # NULL only matches NULL
[1] "`1:10` should be `NULL` (is \"integer\")"
Treating NULL
inconsistently depending on whether it is nested or not is a compromise designed to make alike
a better fit for argument validation because arguments that are NULL
by default are fairly common.
alike
will check for self-referential loops in nested environments and prevent infinite recursion. If you somehow introduce a self-referential structure in a template without using environments then alike
will get stuck in an infinite recursion loop.
We are currently considering adding new comparison modes for lists that would allow for checks more similar to environments (see #29).
Alikeness for these types of objects is a little harder to define. We have settled on somewhat arbitrary semantics, though hopefully they are intuitive. These may change in the future as we gain experience using alike
with these types of objects. This is particularly true of functions.
Language objects are also compared recursively, but alikeness has a slightly different meaning for them:
alike(quote(sum(a, b)), quote(sum(x, y))) # calls are consistent
[1] TRUE
alike(quote(sum(a, b)), quote(sum(x, x))) # calls are inconsistent
[1] "`quote(sum(x, x))[[3]]` should not be `x`"
alike(quote(mean(a, b)), quote(sum(x, y))) # functions are different
[1] "`quote(sum(x, y))[[1]]` should be a call to `mean` (is a call to `sum`)"
Since variables can contain anything we do not require them to match directly across calls. In the examples above the second call fails because the template defines different variables for each argument, but the current
object uses the same variable twice. The third call fails because the functions are different and as such the calls are fundamentally different.
If a function is defined in the calling frame, alike
will match.call
it prior to testing alikeness:
<- function(a, b, c) NULL
fun alike(quote(fun(p, q, p)), quote(fun(y, x, x)))
[1] "`quote(fun(y, x, x))[[4]]` should be `y` (is `x`)"
# `match.call` re-orders arguments
alike(quote(fun(p, q, p)), quote(fun(b=y, x, x)))
[1] TRUE
Constants match any constants, but keep in mind that expressions like 1:10
or c(1, 2, 3)
are calls to :
and c
respectively, not constants in the context of language objects.
NULL
is a wild card in calls as well:
str(one.arg.tpl <- as.call(list(NULL, NULL)))
language NULL(NULL)
alike(one.arg.tpl, quote(log(10)))
[1] TRUE
alike(one.arg.tpl, quote(sd(runif(20))))
[1] TRUE
alike(one.arg.tpl, quote(log(10, 10)))
[1] "`quote(log(10, 10))` should have 1 arguments (has 2)"
Calls to (
are ignored when comparing calls since parentheses are redundant in call trees because the tree structure encodes operation precedence independent of operator precedence.
We concede that the rules for “alikeness” of language objects are arbitrary, but hope the outcomes of those rules is generally intuitive. Unfortunately value and structure are somewhat intertwined for language objects so we must impose our own view of what is value and what is structure.
Formulas are treated like calls, except that constants must match:
alike(y ~ x ^ 2, a ~ b ^ 2)
[1] TRUE
alike(y ~ x ^ 2, a ~ b ^ 3)
[1] "`(a ~ b^3)[[3]][[3]]` should have identical constant values"
Functions are alike
if the signature of the current
function can reasonably be interpreted as a valid method for the target
function.
alike(print, print.default) # print can be the generic for print.default
[1] TRUE
alike(print.default, print) # but not vice versa
[1] "`print` should have argument `digits` after argument `x`"
A method of a generic must have all arguments present in the generic, with the same default values if those are defined. If the generic contains ...
then the method may have additional arguments, but must also contain ...
.
Potential changes / improvements for function comparison are being considered in #35.
S4 and RC objects are considered alike if current
inherits from class(target)
. Since these objects embed structural information in their definitions alike
relies on class alone to establish alikeness.
Objects of the following types are actually references to specific memory locations:
These are typically attached as attributes to other objects that contain the information required to establish alikeness (e.g. data.table
, byte-compiled functions), so we only check their type.
Much of the structure of an object is determined by attributes. alike
recursively compares object attributes and requires them to be alike
, unless the attribute is a special attribute or an environment. Environments within attributes in the template must be matched by an environment, but nothing is checked about the environments to avoid expensive computations on objects that commonly include environments in their attributes (e.g. formulas); note this is different than the treatment of environments as actual objects.
Only attributes present in the template object are checked:
alike(structure(logical(1L), a=integer(3L)), structure(TRUE, a=1:3, b=letters))
[1] TRUE
alike(structure(TRUE, a=1:3, b=letters), structure(logical(1L), a=integer(3L)))
[1] "`structure(logical(1L), a = integer(3L))` should have attribute \"b\""
Attributes present in current
but missing in target
may be anything at all.
The special attributes are names
, row.names
, dim
, dimnames
, class
, tsp
, and levels
. These attributes are discussed in sections 2.2 and 2.3 of the R Language Definition, and have well defined and consistently applied semantics in R. Since the semantics of these attributes are well known, we are able to define “alikeness” for them in a more granular way than we can for arbitrary attributes.
We also consider srcref
to be a special attribute. This attribute is not checked.
If present in target
, then must be matched exactly by the corresponding attribute in current
, except that:
target
names
/row.names
(i.e. character(0L)
) will match any character names
/row.names
""
) in a target
names
/row.names
character vector will allow any value to match at the corresponding position of the current
names
/row.names
vectoralike(setNames(integer(), character()), 1:3)
[1] "`1:3` should have attribute \"names\""
alike(setNames(integer(), character()), c(a=1, b=2, c=3))
[1] TRUE
alike(setNames(integer(3), c("", "", "Z")), c(a=1, b=2, c=3))
[1] "`names(c(a = 1, b = 2, c = 3))[3]` should be \"Z\" (is \"c\")"
alike(setNames(integer(3), c("", "", "Z")), c(a=1, b=2, Z=3))
[1] TRUE
dim
attributes must be identical between target
and current
, except that if a value of the dim
vector is zero in target
then the corresponding value in current
can be any value. This is how comparisons like the following succeed:
<- matrix(integer(), ncol=3) # partially specified matrix
mx.tpl alike(mx.tpl, matrix(sample(1:12), nrow=4))
[1] TRUE
alike(mx.tpl, matrix(sample(1:12), nrow=3)) # wrong number of columns
[1] "`matrix(sample(1:12), nrow = 3)` should have 3 columns (has 4)"
str(mx.tpl) # notice 0 for 1st dimension
int[0 , 1:3]
Must also be identical, except that if the target
value of the dimnames
list for a particular dimension is NULL
, then the corresponding dimnames
value in current
may be anything. As with names
, zero character dimname
element elements match any name.
<- matrix(integer(), ncol=3, dimnames=list(row.id=NULL, c("R", "G", "")))
mx.tpl <- matrix(sample(0:255, 12), ncol=3, dimnames=list(row.id=1:4, rgb=c("R", "G", "Blue")))
mx.cur <- matrix(sample(0:255, 12), ncol=3, dimnames=list(1:4, c("R", "G", "b")))
mx.cur2
alike(mx.tpl, mx.cur)
[1] TRUE
alike(mx.tpl, mx.cur2)
[1] "`dimnames(mx.cur2)` should have attribute \"names\""
Note that dimnames
can have a names
attribute. This names
attributed is treated as described in row.names and names.
names(dimnames(mx.tpl))
[1] "row.id" ""
S3 objects are considered alike if the current
class inherits from the target
class. Note that “inheritance” here is used in a stricter context than in the typical S3 application:
target
must be present in current
current
must be the same as the last class in target
To illustrate:
<- structure(TRUE, class=c("a", "b", "c"))
tpl <- structure(TRUE, class=c("x", "a", "b", "c"))
cur <- structure(TRUE, class=c("a", "b", "c", "x"))
cur2
alike(tpl, cur)
[1] TRUE
alike(tpl, cur2)
[1] "`class(cur2)[2]` should be \"a\" (is \"b\")"
The tsp
attribute of ts
objects behaves similarly to the dim
attribute. Any component (i.e. start, end, frequency) that is set to zero will act as a wild card. Other components must be identical. It is illegal to set tsp
components to zero throught the standard R interface, but you may use abstract
as a work-around.
Levels are compared like row.names and names.
This attribute is completely ignored.
If an object contains one of the special attributes, but the attribute value is inconsistent with the standard definition of the attribute, alike
will silently treat that attribute as any other normal attribute.
You can use the settings
parameter to alike
to modify comparison behavior. See ?vetr_settings
for details.
You can always create your own templates by manually building R structures:
<- integer(1L)
int.scalar 2.by.4 <- matrix(integer(), 2, 4)
int.mat.# A df without column names
<- structure(
df.chr.num.num list(character(), numeric(), numeric()), class="data.frame"
)
Alternatively, you can start with a known structure, and abstract away the instance-specific details. For example, suppose we are sending sample collectors out on the field to record information about iris flowers:
<- iris[0, ]
iris.tpl alike(iris.tpl, iris.sample.1) # make sure they submit data correctly
Or equivalently:
<- abstract(iris) iris.tpl
abstract
is an S3 generic defined by alike
along with methods for common objects. abstract
primarily sets the length
of atomic vectors to zero:
abstract(list(c(a=1, b=2, c=3), letters))
[[1]]
named numeric(0)
[[2]]
character(0)
and also abstracts the dim
, dimnames
, and tsp
attributes if present. Other attributes are left untouched unless a specific abstract
method exists for a particular object that also modifies attributes. One example of such a method is abstract.lm
, and it does some minor tweaking to the base abstractions to allow us to match models produced by lm
:
<- data.frame(x=runif(3), y=runif(3), z=runif(3))
df.dummy <- abstract(lm(y ~ x + z, df.dummy))
mdl.tpl # TRUE, expecting bi-variate model
alike(mdl.tpl, lm(Sepal.Length ~ Sepal.Width + Petal.Width, iris))
[1] TRUE
alike(mdl.tpl, lm(Sepal.Length ~ Sepal.Width, iris))
[1] "`lm(Sepal.Length ~ Sepal.Width, iris)$terms[[3]]` should be a call to `+` (is \"symbol\")"
The error message is telling us that at index "terms"
(i.e. lm(Sepal.Length ~ Sepal.Width, iris)$terms
) alike
was expecting a call to +
instead of a symbol (i.e Sepal.Width + <somevar>
instead of Sepal.Width
). The message could certainly be more eloquent, but with a little context it should provide enough information to figure out the problem.
We have gone to great lengths to make alike
fast so that it can be included in other functions without concerns for what overhead:
<- function(a, b)
type_and_len typeof(a) == typeof(b) && length(a) == length(b) # for reference
bench_mark(times=1e4,
identical(rivers, rivers),
alike(rivers, rivers),
type_and_len(rivers, rivers)
)
Mean eval time from 10000 iterations, in microseconds:
identical(rivers, rivers) ~ 0.75
alike(rivers, rivers) ~ 3.35
type_and_len(rivers, rivers) ~ 2.15
While alike
is slower than identical
and the comparable bare bones R function, it is competitive with a bare bones R function that checks types and length. As objects grow more complex, identical
will obviously pull ahead, though alike
should be sufficiently fast for most applications:
bench_mark(times=1e4,
identical(mtcars, mtcars),
alike(mtcars, mtcars)
)
Mean eval time from 10000 iterations, in microseconds:
identical(mtcars, mtcars) ~ 0.7
alike(mtcars, mtcars) ~ 15.1
In the above example, we are comparing the data frames, their attributes, and the 11 columns individually.
Keep in mind that the complexity of the alike
comparison is driven by the complexity of the template, not the object we are checking, so we can always manage the expense of the alike
evaluation.
Comparisons that succeed will be substantially faster than comparisons that fail as the construction of error messages is non-trivial and we have prioritized optimization in the success case.
Language object comparison is relatively slow. We intend to optimize this some day.
Templates with large numbers of attributes (e.g. > 25) may scale non-linearly. We intend to optimize this some day, though in our experience objects with that many attributes are rare (note having multiple objects each with a handful attributes nested in recursive structures is not a problem).
Large objects will be slower to evaluate. Let us revisit the lm
example, though this time we compare our template to itself to ensure that the comparisons succeed for alike
, all.equal
, and identical
:
<- abstract(lm(y ~ x + z, data.frame(x=runif(3), y=runif(3), z=runif(3))))
mdl.tpl # compare mdl.tpl to itself to ensure success in all three scenarios
bench_mark(
alike(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl),
all.equal(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl), # for reference
identical(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl)
)
Mean eval time from 1000 iterations, in microseconds:
alike(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl) ~ 284
all.equal(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl) ~ 2232
identical(mdl.tpl, mdl.tpl) ~ 2
Even with template as large as lm
results (check str(mdl.tpl)
) we can evaluate alike
thousands of times before the overhead becomes noticeable.
Some fairly innocuous R expressions carry substantial overhead. Consider:
<- data.frame(a=integer(), b=numeric())
df.tpl <- data.frame(a=1:10, b=1:10 + .1)
df.cur
bench_mark(
alike(df.tpl, df.cur),
alike(data.frame(integer(), numeric()), df.cur)
)
Mean eval time from 1000 iterations, in microseconds:
alike(df.tpl, df.cur) ~ 9
alike(data.frame(integer(), numeric()).. ~ 390
data.frame
is a particularly slow constructor, but in general you are best served by defining your templates (including calls to abstract
) outside of your function so they are created on package load rather than every time your function is called.
alike
as an S3 genericalike
is not currently an S3 generic, but will likely one in the future provided we can create an implementation with and acceptable performance profile.