On Wed, 28 May 2003, Paul Lemmens wrote:
Hi!
Apologies for sending the mail without any code. Apparently somewhere along
the way the .R attachments got filtered out. I have included the code below
as clean as possible. My original mail is below the code.
I still think you need not to be
Hoi Thomas,
--On woensdag 28 mei 2003 7:16 -0700 Thomas Lumley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Paul Lemmens wrote:
Hi!
Apologies for sending the mail without any code. Apparently somewhere
along the way the .R attachments got filtered out. I have included the
code below as clean
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Paul Lemmens wrote:
Hoi Thomas,
--On woensdag 28 mei 2003 7:16 -0700 Thomas Lumley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Paul Lemmens wrote:
Hi!
Apologies for sending the mail without any code. Apparently somewhere
along the way the .R attachments
Try the following function (the name is supposed to be a joke, by the
way),
which will also do the right thing with NAs and characters. Use it as
if(equal.enough(x,y)) rather than if(x==y), e.g.
equal.enough(0.1+0.2, 0.3)
[1] TRUE
My default of 15 significant figures may be overkill in many
No problem, equal.enough(1+1,3,d.p.zero=10) !
But seriously, this is WHY NOT do that substitution: it helps me
remember
that I am not in fact truly testing for numeric identity.
S
-Original Message-
From: Barry Rowlingson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 May 2003 17:03
To: Simon
