@@ -654,7 +654,7 @@ y <- x %>% map(safely(log))
 | 
			
		||||
str(y)
 | 
			
		||||
```
 | 
			
		||||
 | 
			
		||||
This would be easier to work with if we had two lists: one of all the errors and one of all the output. That's easy to get with `purrr::transpose()` (you'll learn more about `transpose()` in [transpose])
 | 
			
		||||
This would be easier to work with if we had two lists: one of all the errors and one of all the output. That's easy to get with `purrr::transpose()` (you'll learn more about `transpose()` in [Switching levels in the hierarchy])
 | 
			
		||||
 | 
			
		||||
```{r}
 | 
			
		||||
y <- y %>% transpose()
 | 
			
		||||
@@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ params
 | 
			
		||||
```
 | 
			
		||||
 | 
			
		||||
As soon as your code gets complicated, I think a data frame is a good approach because it ensures that each column has a name and is the same length as all the other columns.
 | 
			
		||||
We'll come back to this idea in [hierarchy], and again when we explore the intersection of dplyr, purrr, and model fitting.
 | 
			
		||||
We'll come back to this idea in [Handling hierarchy], and again when we explore the intersection of dplyr, purrr, and model fitting.
 | 
			
		||||
 | 
			
		||||
### Invoking different functions
 | 
			
		||||
 | 
			
		||||
 
 | 
			
		||||
		Reference in New Issue
	
	Block a user