search for: repugn

...ys Function `is.na<-' may provide a safer way to set missingness. It behaves differently for factors, for example. However, "MAY provide" is a bit scary, and it doesn't say WHAT the difference in behaviour is. I must say that "is.na(x) <- ..." is rather repugnant, because it doesn't work. What do I mean? Well, as the designers of SETL who many years ago coined the term "sinister function call" to talk about f(...)<-..., pointed out, if you do f(x) <- y then afterwards you expect f(x) == y to be true. So let's try it:...