similar to: "table(droplevels(aq)$Month)" in manual page of droplevels

Hello, Inline. Em 12-04-2017 16:40, Henric Winell escreveu: > (Let's keep the discussion on-list -- I've added back R-devel.) > > On 2017-04-12 16:39, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>>>> Henric Winell <nilsson.henric at gmail.com> schrieb am 12.04.2017 >>>>> um 15:35 in >> Nachricht <b66fe849-bb8d-f00d-87e5-553f866d57e0 at gmail.com>:

(Let's keep the discussion on-list -- I've added back R-devel.) On 2017-04-12 16:39, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>> Henric Winell <nilsson.henric at gmail.com> schrieb am 12.04.2017 >>>> um 15:35 in > Nachricht <b66fe849-bb8d-f00d-87e5-553f866d57e0 at gmail.com>: >> On 2017-04-12 14:40, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> >>> The last line of the

>>>>> Rui Barradas <ruipbarradas at sapo.pt> >>>>> on Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:07:45 +0100 writes: > Hello, Inline. > Em 12-04-2017 16:40, Henric Winell escreveu: >> (Let's keep the discussion on-list -- I've added back >> R-devel.) >> >> On 2017-04-12 16:39, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>

Dear all, Today I figured out that there is a neat function called droplevels, which, well, drops unused levels in a data frame. I tried the function with some of my data sets and it turned out that not only the unused levels were dropped but also the contrasts I set via "C". I had a look into the code, and this behaviour arises from the fact that droplevels uses simply factor to drop

In R devel r71124, if 'x' is a factor, droplevels(x) gives factor(x, exclude = NULL) . In R 3.3.1, it gives factor(x) . If a factor 'x' has NA and levels of 'x' doesn't contain NA, factor(x) gives the expected result for droplevels(x) , but factor(x, exclude = NULL) doesn't. As I said in https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2016-May/072796.html , factor(x,

>>>>> Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> >>>>> on Tue, 16 May 2017 11:01:23 +0200 writes: >>>>> Serge Bibauw <sbibauw at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 11:59:32 -0400 writes: >> Hi, >> Just reporting a small bug? not really a big deal, but I >> don?t think that is

>>>>> Henric Winell <nilsson.henric at gmail.com> >>>>> on Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:37:42 +0100 writes: > Hi, On 2017-02-07 13:12, Benjamin Tyner wrote: >> Hello >> >> When loading a package, I'm wondering if it's frowned >> upon for the package to alter the state of the random >> number

Hi, Just reporting a small bug? not really a big deal, but I don?t think that is intended: droplevels()?also drops all object?s attributes. Example: > > test <- c("hello", "something", "hi") > > test <- factor(test) > > comment(test) <- "this is a test" > > attr(test, "description") <- "this is another

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 > > >

Hi, I've implemented parallelization in one of my packages using the 'parallel' package -- many thanks for providing it! In my package I'm importing 'parallel' and so added it to the DESCRIPTION file's 'Import:' tag and also added a 'importFrom("parallel", ...)' statement in the NAMESPACE file. Parallelization works nicely, but my package

Hello When loading a package, I'm wondering if it's frowned upon for the package to alter the state of the random number generator? I guess not, since the parallel package does it? > set.seed(6860) > old.seed <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed > library(parallel) > new.seed <- .GlobalEnv$.Random.seed > identical(old.seed, new.seed) [1] FALSE I ask

Hi, I ran into a problem where I actually need rank(, ties.method="last"). It would be great to have this feature in base and it's also simple to get (see below). Thanks & cheers, Marius rank2 <- function (x, na.last = TRUE, ties.method = c("average", "first", "last", # new "last" "random", "max",

After installing R-3.4.0 I ran 'make check' which halted here: $ > tail reg-tests-1d.Rout.fail -n 16 > ## format()ing invalid hand-constructed POSIXlt objects > d <- as.POSIXlt("2016-12-06"); d$zone <- 1 > tools::assertError(format(d)) > d$zone <- NULL > stopifnot(identical(format(d),"2016-12-06")) > d$zone <- "CET" # =

After installing R-3.4.0 I ran 'make check' which halted here: $ > tail reg-tests-1d.Rout.fail -n 16 > ## format()ing invalid hand-constructed POSIXlt objects > d <- as.POSIXlt("2016-12-06"); d$zone <- 1 > tools::assertError(format(d)) > d$zone <- NULL > stopifnot(identical(format(d),"2016-12-06")) > d$zone <- "CET" # =

hello, I am very new to R. My current data set is a mix of values and categories. It is a geoscience data set, with values per rock sample. Case in point, each sample belongs to a lithology class, and each sample has several physical property measurements (density, porosity...). I want to be able to plot these physical properties for all samples in each lithology class. this is how i'm doing

In R devel r71157, 'droplevels' documentation, in "Arguments" section, says this about argument 'exclude'. passed to factor(); factor levels which should be excluded from the result even if present. Note that this was implicitly NA in R <= 3.3.1 which did drop NA levels even when present in x, contrary to the documentation. The current default is compatible with x[ ,

[Env: R 2.14.2 / Win Xp] In the script below, I want to select some variables from rrcov::OsloTransect, delete cases with any missing data, and subset the data frame Oslo to remove cases for two levels of the factor litho that occur with low frequency. The checks I run on my new data frame Oslo look OK, but I when I try to fit a multivariate linear model with lm(), I am getting an error:

I am basically fine with the change. How about using just the following? if(!is.character(exclude)) exclude <- as.vector(exclude, typeof(x)) # may result in NA x <- as.character(x) It looks simpler and is, more or less, equivalent. In factor.Rd, in description of argument 'exclude', "(when \code{x} is a \code{factor} already)" can be removed. A larger

------------------ >>>>> 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

Dear all, I had a R segmentation fault, and then invoked debug mode and ran step by step. When I reached "terms(Y~X1*X2*...*X16)", I would then have "segmentation" fault. However, if I just ran this under regular "R interactive" mode, it would be fine though taking long time. My questions are: 1. Is there a known limit of terms for a formula? 2. Why does the