similar to: Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf"

2017 May 23
2
Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf
I initially thought this is "documented behaviour". ?sprintf says: Numeric variables with __exactly integer__ values will be coerced to integer. (emphasis mine). Turns out this only works when the first value is numeric and not NA, as shown by the following example: > sprintf("%d", as.numeric(c(NA,1))) Error in sprintf("%d", as.numeric(c(NA, 1))) : invalid
2017 May 23
2
Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf
https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/issues/2171 The fix was easy, it's just surprising to see the behavior change almost on a whim. Just wanted to point it out in case this is unknown behavior, but Evan seems to have found this as well. On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Michael Chirico <michaelchirico4 at gmail.com > wrote: > Astute observation. And of course we should be
2017 May 23
0
Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf
Yes, what Joris posts about is exactly what I noted in my March 9th post to R-devel. The behaviour is sort of documented, but not in the clearest manner (in my opinion). Like I say, my ultimate conclusion was that the silent coercion of numerics to integers by sprintf() was a handy convenience, but not one that should be relied about to always work predictably. On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:02 AM,
2017 May 23
0
Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf
Astute observation. And of course we should be passing integer when we use %d. It's an edge case in how we printed ITime objects in data.table: On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Joris Meys <jorismeys at gmail.com> wrote: > I initially thought this is "documented behaviour". ?sprintf says: > > Numeric variables with __exactly integer__ values will be coerced to >
2017 May 23
0
Inconsistency in handling of numeric input with %d by sprintf
Hi Michael, I posted something on this topic to R-devel several weeks ago, but never got a response. My ultimate conclusion is that sprintf() isn't super consistent in how it handles coercion: sometimes it'll coerce real to integer without complaint, other times it won't. (My particular email had to do with the vectors longer than 1 and their positioning vis-a-vis the format string.)
2023 Nov 06
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
Hmm, it is not actually at odds with help(c), it is just that the autocoercion works different that it used to, so that as.complex(NA) == as.complex(NA_real) == NA_real_+0i) which now differs from NA_complex although both print as NA. I haven't been quite alert when this change was discussed, but it does look a bit unfortunate that usage patterns like c(NA, 0+1i) does not give complex NA
2020 May 23
2
Should 0L * NA_integer_ be 0L?
I don't see this specific case documented anywhere (I also tried to search the r-devel archives, as well as I could); the only close reference mentions NA & FALSE = FALSE, NA | TRUE = TRUE. And there's also this snippet from R-lang: In cases where the result of the operation would be the same for all > possible values the NA could take, the operation may return this value. >
2023 Nov 05
2
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
This is another follow-up to the thread from September "Recent changes to as.complex(NA_real_)". A test in data.table was broken by the changes for NA coercion to complex; the breakage essentially comes from c(NA, 0+1i) # vs c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i) The former is the output we tested against; the latter is essentially (via coerceVector() in C) what's generated by our
2023 Nov 08
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
So, to summarize, the open questions are: (1) Should as.complex(NA_character_) give complex(r=NA_real_, i=0) instead of NA_complex_? (2) Should the first argument in c(NA, x) and c(NA_integer_, x), where typeof(x) == "complex", be promoted to complex(r=NA_real_, i=0) instead of NA_complex_? My opinions: (1) No. The imaginary part of the
2023 Nov 09
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
>>>>> Mikael Jagan >>>>> on Wed, 8 Nov 2023 11:13:18 -0500 writes: > So, to summarize, the open questions are: > (1) Should as.complex(NA_character_) give complex(r=NA_real_, i=0) > instead of NA_complex_? > (2) Should the first argument in c(NA, x) and c(NA_integer_, x), > where typeof(x) == "complex", be promoted
2009 Jun 03
2
Create a time interval from a single time variable
I am trying to set up a data set for a survival analysis with time-varying covariates. The data is already in a long format, but does not have a variable to signify the stopping point for the interval. The variable DaysEnrolled is the variable I would like to use to form this interval. This is what I have now: ID Age DaysEnrolled HAZ WAZ WHZ Food onARV
2023 Apr 14
1
Possible inconsistency between `as.complex(NA_real_)` and the docs
Hi all, Surprisingly (at least to me), `as.complex(NA_real_)` results in `complex(real = NA_real_, imaginary = 0)` rather than `NA_complex_`. It seems to me that this goes against the docs of `as.complex()`, which say this in the Details section: "Up to R versions 3.2.x, all forms of NA and NaN were coerced to a complex NA, i.e., the NA_complex_ constant, for which both the real and
2023 Nov 07
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
Thanks Martin. My hang-up was not on what the outcome of as.complex(NA) should be, but rather, how I should read code like c(x, y) generally. Till now, I have thought of it like 'c(x, y)' is c(as(x, typeof(y)), y)` when "type(y) > type(x)". Basically in my mind, "coercion" in R <-> as.<newtype>(.) (or coerceVector() in C). So I tracked down the source
2023 Nov 06
1
c(NA, 0+1i) not the same as c(as.complex(NA), 0+1i)?
>>>>> Michael Chirico >>>>> on Sun, 5 Nov 2023 09:41:42 -0800 writes: > This is another follow-up to the thread from September > "Recent changes to as.complex(NA_real_)". > A test in data.table was broken by the changes for NA > coercion to complex; the breakage essentially comes from > c(NA, 0+1i) > # vs
2016 Nov 18
2
problem with normalizePath()
>>>>> Evan Cortens <ecortens at mtroyal.ca> >>>>> on Thu, 17 Nov 2016 15:51:03 -0700 writes: > I wonder if this could be related to the issue that I > submitted to bugzilla about two months ago? ( > https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17159) > That is to say, could it be that it's treating the first >
2009 May 29
1
png() error in recent R-devel on Windows
Hi, Tested with the latest r-devel snapshot build for Windows (2009-05-28 r48663): > png("test.png") Error in png("test.png") : invalid value of 'fillOddEven' The png() function is defined like this: > png function (filename = "Rplot%03d.png", width = 480, height = 480, units = "px", pointsize = 12, bg = "white", res = NA,
2016 Nov 30
1
problem with normalizePath()
I found this as well. At our institution, our home directories are on network shares that are mapped to local drives. The default, it appears, is to set the location for libraries (etc) to the network share name (//computer//share/director/a/b/user) rather than the local drive mapping (H:/). Given the issue with dir.create(), this means it's impossible to install packages (since it tries to
2019 Jan 11
2
strtoi output of empty string inconsistent across platforms
Identified as root cause of a bug in data.table: https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/issues/3267 On my machine, strtoi("", base = 2L) produces NA_integer_ (which seems consistent with ?strtoi: "Values which cannot be interpreted as integers or would overflow are returned as NA_integer_"). But on all the other machines I've seen, 0L is returned. This seems to be
2019 May 27
2
rbind has confusing result for custom sub-class (possible bug?)
Yes, thanks for following up on thread here. And thanks again for clearing things up, your email was a finger snap of clarity on the whole issue. I'll add that actually it was data.table's code at fault on the storage conversion -- note that if you use an arbitrary sub-class 'foo' with no methods defined, it'll stay integer. That's because [<- calls as.Date and then
2019 Jan 11
2
strtoi output of empty string inconsistent across platforms
>>>>> Martin Maechler >>>>> on Fri, 11 Jan 2019 09:44:14 +0100 writes: >>>>> Michael Chirico >>>>> on Fri, 11 Jan 2019 14:36:17 +0800 writes: >> Identified as root cause of a bug in data.table: >> https://github.com/Rdatatable/data.table/issues/3267 >> On my machine, strtoi("", base =