Hi! I noticed that cumsum behaves different than the other cumulative functions wrt. NaN values: > values <- c(1,2,NaN,1) > for ( f in c(cumsum, cumprod, cummin, cummax)) print(f(values)) [1] 1 3 NA NA [1] 1 2 NaN NaN [1] 1 1 NaN NaN [1] 1 2 NaN NaN
The reason is that cumsum (in cum.c:33) contains an explicit check for ISNAN. Is that intentional? IMHO, ISNA would be better (because it would make the behavior consistent with the other functions). - Lukas ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
