Also, the na.omit method for data.frame with list column seems to be
inconsistent with is.na,
> L <- list(NULL, NA, 0)
> str(f <- data.frame(I(L)))
'data.frame': 3 obs. of 1 variable:
$ L:List of 3
..$ : NULL
..$ : logi NA
..$ : num 0
..- attr(*, "class")= chr "AsIs"
> is.na(f)
L
[1,] FALSE
[2,] TRUE
[3,] FALSE
> na.omit(f)
L
1
2 NA
3 0
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 9:58 PM Toby Hocking <tdho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> na.omit is documented as "na.omit returns the object with incomplete cases
> removed." and "At present these will handle vectors," so I expected that
> when it is used on a list, it should return the same thing as if we subset
> via is.na; however I observed the following,
>
> > L <- list(NULL, NA, 0)
> > str(L[!is.na(L)])
> List of 2
> $ : NULL
> $ : num 0
> > str(na.omit(L))
> List of 3
> $ : NULL
> $ : logi NA
> $ : num 0
>
> Should na.omit be fixed so that it returns a result that is consistent
> with is.na? I assume that is.na is the canonical definition of what
> should be considered a missing value in R.
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
