There appears to be an issue with the decreasing=TRUE option on the order()
function that indicates either a bug or perhaps a design flaw (potentially
flawed because I would suggest the majority of users would expect different
behaviour).
# demonstration of problem:
x <- c(2,1,3,4,5)
order(x)
order(x, decreasing=TRUE)
order(x) correctly reports the order as:
2 1 3 4 5
I expected the result for order(x, decreasing=TRUE) to be:
4 5 3 2 1
but the values actually reported are:
5 4 3 1 2
which is also the result of order(-x) (this may indicate a possible cause of
this issue?).
Thus, the decreasing=TRUE option in the order() function does not reverse the
order of the values reported under the default of decreasing=FALSE in an
example with no ties. If this behaviour is by design I am struggling to
understand what purpose the decreasing=TRUE option serves and would like to
suggest that this is not consistent with how many (most?) users would expect
this option to work.
Tested on R2.15.3 and 3.0.1 (both x86_64 linux-gnu) with identical results. I
have also tried it on other series of numbers with the same result.
Apologies if this has been discussed or reported elsewhere but I could not find
any relevant posts. Perhaps I have failed to understand some fundamental issue?
Sorry if this is me being dimwitted - it does seem hard to believe that there
is a bug in a relatively straightforward r-base function. But I thought I would
mention this as it could impact many people.
Many thanks to all the R developers and R community for producing and
supporting such an outstanding and invaluable product.
Hawthorne Beyer
University of Queensland
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
