search for: _no_na

Hi, I would like to figure out the meaning of the return value of these two functions. Here are the default definitions I find from R source code: static int altreal_Is_sorted_default(SEXP x) { return UNKNOWN_SORTEDNESS; } static int altreal_No_NA_default(SEXP x) { return 0; } I guess the macro *UNKNOWN_SORTEDNESS *in *Is_sorted* and 0 in *No_NA *simply means unknown sorted/NA status of the vector, so R will loop over the vector and find the answer. However, what should we return in these functions to indicate whether the vector has been so...

..._NA_1ST = -2, SORTED_DECR = -1, UNKNOWN_SORTEDNESS = INT_MIN, /*INT_MIN is NA_INTEGER! */ SORTED_INCR = 1, SORTED_INCR_NA_1ST = 2, KNOWN_UNSORTED = 0}; The default value there is NA_INTEGER (ie INT_MIN), indicating that there is no sortedness information. Currently, *_NO_NA effectively return a boolean, (even though the actual return value is int). This can be seen in the method we provide for compact sequences in altclasses.c: static int compact_intseq_No_NA(SEXP x) { #ifdef COMPACT_INTSEQ_MUTABLE /* If the vector has been expanded it may have been modified. *...

...UNKNOWN_SORTEDNESS = INT_MIN, /*INT_MIN is NA_INTEGER! */ > SORTED_INCR = 1, > SORTED_INCR_NA_1ST = 2, > KNOWN_UNSORTED = 0}; > > The default value there is NA_INTEGER (ie INT_MIN), indicating that there > is no sortedness information. > > Currently, *_NO_NA effectively return a boolean, (even though the actual > return value is int). This can be seen in the method we provide for compact > sequences in altclasses.c: > > > static int compact_intseq_No_NA(SEXP x) > { > #ifdef COMPACT_INTSEQ_MUTABLE > /* If the vector has been...