similar to: documented/undocumented behavior of as.double(formatC(x, digits=17))

Hi all After posting what follows, Duncan Murdoch suggested perhaps a bug in formatC, or an error on documentation. Any comments? In particular, bug, error or not, any ideas about how I can consistently get two significant figures to print? P. ---------- Original Message ---------- Hi all I am not a C programmer, but I am trying to understand formatC to get consistent printing of

Hi all I am not a C programmer, but I am trying to understand formatC to get consistent printing of reals to a given number of significant digits. Can someone please explain this to me? These first three give what I expect on reading ?formatC: > formatC(0.0059999, digits=2,format="fg",flag="#") [1] "0.0060" > formatC(0.59999,

Hi, I am not sure if this is just me using R (R-2.3.1 and R-2.4.0) in the wrong way or if there is a more serious bug. I was having problems getting some calculations to add up so I ran the following tests: > (2.34567 - 2.00000) == 0.34567 <------- should be true [1] FALSE > (2.23-2.00) == 0.23 <------- should be true [1] FALSE > 4-2==2 [1] TRUE > (4-2)==2 [1] TRUE >

OK: > formatC(as.double(c(1,0,NA))) [1] "1" "0" "NA" NOT OK: > formatC(as.integer(c(1,0,NA))) [1] "0" "1072693248" "NA" > formatC(as.integer(c(0,1,NA))) [1] "0" "0" "NA" BUG TRACED TO R-code of formatC() where x[!Ok] <- 0 unintendedly changes the storage.mode of x to

[This turned into a bug report which will go to r-devel, so I have taken it off r-help.] Bugs reported here: (1) formatC's help page need some clarification. (2) formatC needs to treat modes "double" and "real" as equivalent. (3) format's help page or (preferably) format needs correction re the meaning of `digits' On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Martin Maechler wrote:

As a sequel to my previous mail on cut, formatC does not produce what I have been taught is significant digits: > x <- c(1.0793,1.0796, 11.0954, 11.0736 ) > formatC(x,digits=3,format="g") [1] "1.08" "1.08" "11.1" "11.1" (3,3,3,3) significant digits OK > formatC(x,digits=3,format="f") [1] "1.079"

Full_Name: Bernd Bischl Version: 2.8.1 OS: Windows XP Professional Submission from: (NULL) (129.217.207.95) Hi, there seems to be a small bug in formatC: formatC("foo", format="s", mode="charcacter") Error in formatC("foo", format = "s", mode = "charcacter") : 'mode' must be "double" ("real") or

formatC() is great for formatting numbers! But it would be even better if it could optionally insert commas (or semicolons), e.g. R> formatC(1234567.89, digits=2, format="f", commas=T) [1] "1,234,567.89" Here's a snippet of code that does that, which could more or less just be inserted into at the end of formatC if any R-core guru were so inclined. "r"

I do not know if this is a bug or a case of improper documentation. The documentation for formatC() implies that the difference between the options format="f" and format="g" is that with "g", scientific format is sometimes used. There is another difference between them that is not mentioned in the documentation. drop0trailing=FALSE is ignored when format is set to

I have a four-digit string I want to convert to five digits. Take the following frame: zip 2108 60321 60321 22030 91910 I need row 1 to read '02108'. This forum directed me to formatC previously (thanks!) That usually works but, for some reason, it's not in this instance. Neither of the syntaxes below change '2108' to '02108.' The values in cand_receipts[,1] are of

Dear R-Developers, Just a note: there are some inconsistencies between formatC(), format() and format.char() and cross calling between these functions. On the one hand > cat(format('{"}'), "\n") {\"} > cat(format.char('{"}'), "\n") {\"} is by default format.char(, flag="-") and thus by default calling format() >

Full_Name: Frederic Schutz Version: 1.6.1 OS: Linux Submission from: (NULL) (128.250.252.193) The result of the following commands: > formatC(9.9, 1, format="fg") [1] "1e+01" > formatC(99.9, 1, format="fg") [1] "1e+02" does not seem to be coherent with what the help page says: > format: equal to `"d"' (for integers),

>>>>> "KevinW" == Kevin Wright <kwright68 at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:13:36 +0100 (CET) writes: KevinW> Full_Name: Kevin Wright KevinW> Version: 2.2.0 KevinW> OS: Windows 2000 ^^^^^^^ this must be part of the problem KevinW> Submission from: (NULL) (170.54.58.4) KevinW> Apologies if

I'm trying to convert a matrix of capture occasions to format that an external program can read. The job is to basically take a row of matrix, like > smp[1,] [1] 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 and convert it to the equivalent string "1101110000" I'm having problems doing this in a speedy way. The simplest solution (calc_history below, using apply, paste and collapse) takes about 2

formatC(0.0001, digits = 3, format = "f", zero.print="< 0.01") Error in strrep(" ", nc - i1) : invalid 'times' value The problem, if it is one, is in .format.zeros: .format.zeros("0.000", "xxxxxx") Error in strrep(" ", nc - i1) : invalid 'times' value R version 3.5.1. David [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Full_Name: Peter Ehlers Version: rw2001pat (2005-02-03) OS: Win XP Submission from: (NULL) (136.159.61.115) formatC(1, flag="s") crashes Rgui. Similarly for flag=[SnZ]. Stupid input, of course, but I'm error-prone. Peter

Hi! Does anyone know hot to set number of digits to be printed in function 'paste'? Tine Mla?

Both of these bugs are not a real harm, however, they have been annoying me for too long ... ;-) 1) print(2^30, digits = 12) #- exponential form; unnecessarily! formatC(2^30, digits = 12) #- shows you what you'd want above ## S-plus is okay here; note that the problem also affects ## paste(.) & format(.) : options(digits=10) paste(2^(4*1:8)) S-plus gives [1] "16"

Stephane Lesage a ?crit : > > Hi Jean-Marc, > > As I told you, bank is a reserved keyword in Analog Devices compiler for > Blackfin architecture. > So we need to change the variables named bank to something else. You mean the VDSP compiler that people seem to have mostly replaced with gcc? > Here's a patch that changes bank to bnk in the 3 concerned files. > (Hope

My understanding is that this checks whether the bit width of the integer *type* fits in the bit width of the mantissa, not the bit width of the integer value. - CL > On Apr 14, 2016, at 6:02 PM, escha at apple.com wrote: > > We already do this to some extent; see this code in InstCombineCasts: > > // fpto{s/u}i({u/s}itofp(X)) --> X or zext(X) or sext(X) or trunc(X) > //