You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While the output of split.network.time.based seems to contain the names, the output of split.network.time.based.by.ranges does not contain the names. However, I am not sure where we actually loose the range names –– split.network.time.based.by.ranges internally calls split.network.time.based.
Versions
At least, the most recent version 4.4 of coronet is affected, and also the current dev branch still contains this inconsistency. I did not check whether we have introduced this inconsistency in version 4.4 or whether this has already been present from the introduction of function split.networks.time.based on.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This change makes splitting by ranges more consistent with time-based
splitting.
This works towards se-sic#273.
Signed-off-by: Maximilian Löffler <[email protected]>
Description
The function
split.networks.time.based
(i.e., plural version networks) has inconsistent behavior regarding range names:If
sliding.window = FALSE
, the returned list of networks contains range names as the names of the list.However, if
sliding.window = TRUE
, there are no names attached to the returned list.This difference might be caused by the two different function calls here (within
split.networks.time.based
) :coronet/util-split.R
Lines 644 to 650 in 751b72f
While the output of
split.network.time.based
seems to contain the names, the output ofsplit.network.time.based.by.ranges
does not contain the names. However, I am not sure where we actually loose the range names ––split.network.time.based.by.ranges
internally callssplit.network.time.based
.Versions
At least, the most recent version 4.4 of coronet is affected, and also the current
dev
branch still contains this inconsistency. I did not check whether we have introduced this inconsistency in version 4.4 or whether this has already been present from the introduction of functionsplit.networks.time.based
on.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: