Replacing the for loop by the map() function to speed up [duplicate]

Question

I create a list called list_ok:

 list_ok <- list()
 a=c(1,2,3,4,5)
 b=c(6,7,8,9,10)
 c=c(11,12,13,14,15)
 d=c(16, 17, 18, 19, 20)
 e=c(21,22,23,24,25)

 list_ok[[1]]=a
 list_ok[[2]]=b
 list_ok[[3]]=c
 list_ok[[4]]=d
 list_ok[[5]]=e

This code below, creates the same list_ok by using a for loop:

new_list <- vector(mode = "list", length=5)

for (i in 1:5) {
  for(k in 1:5) {     
    new_list[[i]][k] <- list_ok[[i]][k]
  }
}

> new_list

How can I do the same exercise using the map function? My problem is to know how to deal with the two different indexes (i and k) in map function.

I will use the same idea in another exercise wich is more complex.

Any help?

I don't understand what you're trying to do. new_list and list_ok are identical. Why do you want to create an identical copy of a list with a for loop (or with purrr::map)? This sounds like an XY problem to me. Can you provide a few more details? — Maurits Evers
– Maurits Evers, Commented Aug 27, 2018 at 1:03
Its just an exercise. Its to simple, I just want to replace the for code by the map function. Its another way of doing the same thing. — Laura
– Laura, Commented Aug 27, 2018 at 1:11
I still don't understand; new_list <- map(list_ok, I) would create an identical copy of ok_list. But in that case why not just new_list <- list_ok? — Maurits Evers
– Maurits Evers, Commented Aug 27, 2018 at 1:18
@MauritsEvers my iidea is to know how to work with map functions with 2 different indexes as the for command above. — Laura
– Laura, Commented Aug 27, 2018 at 1:32
You're thinking about this the wrong way. The advantage of map is that it allows for vectorised functions, i.e. loop throw the elements of a list and then apply a vectorised function on its elements. Thinking about this in terms of 2 "array" indices is the wrong way to think about map (or *apply for that matter), and you end up with convoluted solutions like the ones presented below. If you must use array indices, use a for loop; there is nothing wrong with for loops in R, provided you use them correctly! — Maurits Evers
– Maurits Evers, Commented Aug 27, 2018 at 1:35

Paul · Accepted Answer · 2018-08-27 01:28:04Z

2

How about lapply and sapply with the parallel package to speed up?

library(parallel)

numCores <- detectCores()
cl = makeCluster(numCores)

parLapply(list_ok, function(x)
  sapply(x, function(y) y), cl = cl)

answered Aug 27, 2018 at 1:28

Paul

2,9691 gold badge15 silver badges29 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

Phil · Accepted Answer · 2018-08-27 02:30:51Z

1

You'll find this Q&A useful: purrr map equivalent of nested for loop

For loops within loops, the easiest thing is to create an anonymous function as the second argument for map and within that anonymous function use map again (in this case I'm using map_dbl) with another anonymous function where you can combine one level of loop (x) with another level of loop (y).

library(purrr)

map(list_ok, function(x) map_dbl(seq_along(list_ok), function(y) x[[y]]))

[[1]]
[1] 1 2 3 4 5

[[2]]
[1]  6  7  8  9 10

[[3]]
[1] 11 12 13 14 15

[[4]]
[1] 16 17 18 19 20

[[5]]
[1] 21 22 23 24 25

edited Aug 27, 2018 at 2:30

answered Aug 27, 2018 at 1:33

Phil

8,1973 gold badges42 silver badges76 bronze badges

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Replacing the for loop by the map() function to speed up [duplicate]

2 Answers 2

Comments

Comments

Linked

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

2 Answers 2

Comments

Comments

Linked

Related