Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "to_convert_".
Did you mean:
do_convert
2023 Nov 08
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
...>
> >https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/blob/71e7480b07767f3b7d5c45a4247959aa4d83d910/src/main/bind.c#L418-L425
>
> > And indeed! It's not "coercion" in the sense I just described... there's a
> > branch for the 'x == NA_LOGICAL' case to_convert_ to NA_complex_.
>
> Yes; "of course" ... still, I did not answer your main question,
> as you did ask +/- if c() should not get an adjustment to the
> new as.complex(<numeric-alike>) |--> (Re = NA, Im = 0)
> behavior.
>
> And that is still a valid ope...
2023 Nov 09
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
...; >https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/blob/71e7480b07767f3b7d5c45a4247959aa4d83d910/src/main/bind.c#L418-L425
>>
>> > And indeed! It's not "coercion" in the sense I just described... there's a
>> > branch for the 'x == NA_LOGICAL' case to_convert_ to NA_complex_.
>>
>> Yes; "of course" ... still, I did not answer your main question,
>> as you did ask +/- if c() should not get an adjustment to the
>> new as.complex(<numeric-alike>) |--> (Re = NA, Im = 0)
>> behavior....