On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, George N. White III wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, George N. White III wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm sorry, but this is completely unreproducible, and the second you say
> > > > is true you quote as false.
> > >
> > > Not sure what you mean -- are you saying "make check" passes on
> > > other Irix systems?
> >
> > We don't have an Irix system on which they fail _AND_ your examples
> > are not in the R sources. N.B. as.Date and is.na(strptime()) are not the
> > same code, and your second example is still not explained.
>
> I assume the second example refers to the NA+NaN vs NaN+NA, evidence that
> the system is not doing arithmetic the same way it is done by mainstream
> platforms.
No. You claimed `"make check" fails in 2 places' and said the second was
> d<-strptime("1970/1/1", "%Y/%m/%d")
> is.na(d)
[1] FALSE
> d
[1] "1970-01-01"
and that is not an example of
> "make check" fails in 2 places due to is.na(..) returning TRUE for valid
dates:
since
1) It is not in make check (nor is your first example)
2) The date is valid
3) is.na returns FALSE.
In short, I cannot see anything wrong about that example, and it
seems it is you and not Irix and not R who has a problem with it.
--
Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
