similar to: complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal"

2016 May 28
1
complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal
On 'factor', I meant the case where 'levels' is not specified, where 'unique' is called. > factor(c(complex(real=NaN), complex(imaginary=NaN))) [1] NaN+0i <NA> Levels: NaN+0i Look at <NA> in the result above. Yes, it happens in earlier versions of R, too. On matching both NA and NaN, another consequence is that length(unique(.)) may depend on order.
2016 May 13
1
complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal
That, for example, complex(real=NaN) and complex(imaginary=NaN) are regarded as equal makes it possible that length(unique(as.character(x))) > length(unique(x)) (current code of function 'factor' doesn't expect it). Yes, an argument for the behavior is that NA and NaN are of one kind. On my system, using 32-bit R for Windows from binary from CRAN, the result of sapply(z, match,
2016 Jun 03
0
complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal
With 'z' of length 8 below, or of length 12 previously, one may try sapply(rev(z), match, table = rev(z)) match(rev(z), rev(z)) I found that the two results were different in R devel r70604. A shorter one: > z <- complex(real = c(0,NaN,NaN), imaginary = c(NA,NA,0)) > sapply(z, match, table = z) [1] 1 1 2 > match(z, z) [1] 1 1 3 An explanation of the behavior: With normal
2016 May 10
1
complex NA's match(), etc: not back-compatible change proposal
This is an RFC / announcement related to the 2nd part of PR#16885 https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16885 about complex NA's. The (somewhat rare) incompatibility in R's 3.3.0 match() behavior for the case of complex numbers with NA & NaN's {which has been fixed for R 3.3.0 patched in the mean time} triggered some more comprehensive "research". I
2017 Nov 04
1
ans[nas] <- NA in 'ifelse' (was: ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ?)
Removal of ans[nas] <- NA from the code of function 'ifelse' in R is not committed (yet). Why? -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 28/11/16, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ? Cc: R-devel at r-project.org, maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch Date: Monday, 28 November, 2016, 10:00
2016 Aug 11
2
table(exclude = NULL) always includes NA
I stand corrected. The part "If set to 'NULL', it implies 'useNA="always"'." is even in the documentation in R 2.8.0. It was my fault not to check carefully. I wonder, why "always" was chosen for 'useNA' for exclude = NULL. Why exclude = NULL is so special? What about another 'exclude' of length zero, like character(0) (not c(),
2016 Aug 14
2
table(exclude = NULL) always includes NA
useNA <- if (missing(useNA) && !missing(exclude) && !(NA %in% exclude)) "ifany" An example where it change 'table' result for non-factor input, from https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2005-April/069053.html : x <- c(1,2,3,3,NA) table(as.integer(x), exclude=NaN) I bring the example up, in case that the change in result is not intended.
2016 Sep 26
2
Undocumented 'use.names' argument to c()
By "an argument named 'use.names' is included for concatenation", I meant something like this, that someone might try. > c(as.Date("2016-01-01"), use.names=FALSE) use.names "2016-01-01" "1970-01-01" See, 'use.names' is in the output. That's precisely because 'c.Date' doesn't have 'use.names', so
2019 May 30
2
stopifnot
Here is a patch to function 'stopifnot' that adds 'evaluated' argument and makes 'exprs' argument in 'stopifnot' like 'exprs' argument in 'withAutoprint'. --- stop.R 2019-05-30 14:01:15.282197286 +0000 +++ stop_new.R 2019-05-30 14:01:51.372187466 +0000 @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ .Internal(stop(call., .makeMessage(..., domain = domain))) }
2012 Dec 06
2
factor(x, exclude=y) if x is a factor
I found this part in the documentation of 'factor'. 'factor(x, exclude=NULL)' applied to a factor is a no-operation unless there are unused levels: in that case, a factor with the reduced level set is returned. If 'exclude' is used it should also be a factor with the same level set as 'x' or a set of codes for the levels to be excluded.
2016 Aug 07
2
table(exclude = NULL) always includes NA
This is an example from https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2007-May/132573.html . With R 2.7.2: > a <- c(1, 1, 2, 2, NA, 3); b <- c(2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1) > table(a, b, exclude = NULL) b a 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 0 3 1 0 <NA> 1 0 With R 3.3.1: > a <- c(1, 1, 2, 2, NA, 3); b <- c(2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1) > table(a, b, exclude = NULL) b a 1 2
2017 May 18
2
stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
>From an example in http://www.uni-muenster.de/ZIV.BennoSueselbeck/s-html/helpfiles/nargs.html , number of arguments in '...' can be obtained by (function(...)nargs())(...) . I now realize that sys.call() doesn't expand '...' when the function is called with '...'. It just returns the call as is. If 'stopifnot' uses sys.call() instead of match.call() , the
2017 Aug 19
1
Issues of R_pretty in src/appl/pretty.c
Yes, they work now. I mentioned them partly because the commit description said overflow for large n and partly to be considered for regression tests. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 19/8/17, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] Issues of R_pretty in src/appl/pretty.c Cc: r-devel at r-project.org Date: Saturday, 19 August, 2017,
2017 Aug 18
1
Issues of R_pretty in src/appl/pretty.c
Examples similar to pretty(c(-1,1)*1e300, n = 1e9, min.n = 1) with smaller 'n': pretty(c(-1,1)*1e304, n = 1e5, min.n = 1) pretty(c(-1,1)*1e306, n = 1e3, min.n = 1) A report on 'pretty' when working with integers, similar to what led to change of 'seq' fuzz, is https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=15137 -------------------------------------------- On Tue,
2015 Oct 22
1
(no subject)
------------------ >>>>> Henric Winell <[hidden email]> >>>>> on Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:43:02 +0200 writes: > Den 2015-10-21 kl. 07:24, skrev Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel: >> Marius Hofert-4------------------------------ >>> Den 2015-10-09 kl. 12:14, skrev Martin Maechler: >>> I think so: the code above
2017 Aug 11
2
Issues of R_pretty in src/appl/pretty.c
See https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2017-August/074746.html for the origin of the example here. That pretty(c(-1,1)*1e300, n = 1e9, min.n = 1) gave 20 intervals, far from 1e9, but pretty(c(-1,1)*1e300, n = 1e6, min.n = 1) gave 1000000 intervals (on a machine), made me trace through the code to function 'R_pretty' in https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/appl/pretty.c . *lo is
2015 Oct 21
2
rank(, ties.method="last")
Marius Hofert-4------------------------------ > Den 2015-10-09 kl. 12:14, skrev Martin Maechler: > I think so: the code above doesn't seem to do the right thing. Consider > the following example: > > > x <- c(1, 1, 2, 3) > > rank2(x, ties.method = "last") > [1] 1 2 4 3 > > That doesn't look right to me -- I had expected > > >
2019 Mar 05
2
stopifnot
Another possible shortcut definition: assert <- function(exprs) do.call("stopifnot", list(exprs = substitute(exprs), local = parent.frame())) After thinking again, I propose to use ??? ? ? stop(simpleError(msg, call = if(p <- sys.parent()) sys.call(p))) - It seems that the call is the call of the frame where stopifnot(...) is evaluated. Because that is the correct context, I
2017 Feb 01
1
RFC: tapply(*, ..., init.value = NA)
On 'aggregate data.frame', the URL should be https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2016-May/438631.html . vector(typeof(ans)) (or vector(storage.mode(ans))) has length zero and can be used to initialize array. Instead of if(missing(default)) , if(identical(default, NA)) could be used. The documentation could then say, for example: "If default = NA (the default), NA of appropriate
2018 Mar 24
1
Function 'factor' issues
I am trying once again. By just changing f <- match(xlevs[f], nlevs) to f <- match(xlevs, nlevs)[f] , function 'factor' in R devel could be made more consistent and back-compatible. Why not picking it? -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 25/11/17, Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono <suharto_anggono at yahoo.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] Function