On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 05:06:38PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
The version I have committed a few hours ago is indeed a much
re-simplified version, using as.character(.) explicitly
The current development version (2009-05-11 r48528) contains
in ?factor a description of levels parametr
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Tue, 12 May 2009 13:17:15 +0200 writes:
PS On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 05:06:38PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
The version I have committed a few hours ago is indeed a much
re-simplified version, using as.character(.) explicitly
PS
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 10 May 2009 13:52:53 +0200 writes:
PS On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 10:55:17PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
PS [...]
If'd revert to such a solution,
we'd have to get back to Peter's point about the issue that
he'd think
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 05:06:38PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
[...]
The version I have committed a few hours ago is indeed a much
re-simplified version, using as.character(.) explicitly
and consequently no longer providing the extra optional
arguments that we have had for a couple of days.
On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 10:55:17PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
[...]
If'd revert to such a solution,
we'd have to get back to Peter's point about the issue that
he'd think table(.) should be more tolerant than as.character()
about almost equality.
For compatibility reasons, we could also
At 14:18 08/05/2009, Martin Maechler wrote:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Fri, 8 May 2009 11:01:55 +0200 writes:
Somewhere below Martin asks for alternatives from list readers. I do
not have alternatives, but I do have two comments, one immediately
below this, the other
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Fri, 8 May 2009 18:10:56 +0200 writes:
PS On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 05:14:48PM +0200, Petr Savicky wrote:
Let me suggest to consider the following modification, where match() is
done
on the strings, not on the original values.
levels
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
PD I think that the real issue is that we actually do want almost-equal
PD numbers to be folded together.
yes, this now (revision 48469) will happen by default, using signif(x, 15)
where '15' is the default for the
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Fri, 8 May 2009 11:01:55 +0200 writes:
PS On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
PD I think that the real issue is that we actually do want almost-equal
PD numbers to be folded together.
yes, this now
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 03:18:01PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
As long as we don't want to allow factor(numeric) to fail --rarely --
I think (and that actually has been a recurring daunting thought
for quite a few days) that we probably need an
extra step of checking for duplicate levels,
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 05:14:48PM +0200, Petr Savicky wrote:
Let me suggest to consider the following modification, where match() is done
on the strings, not on the original values.
levels - unique(as.character(sort(unique(x
x - as.character(x)
f - match(x, levels)
An alternative
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Fri, 8 May 2009 18:10:56 +0200 writes:
PS On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 05:14:48PM +0200, Petr Savicky wrote:
Let me suggest to consider the following modification, where match() is
done
on the strings, not on the original values.
levels
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:48:40PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Fri, 8 May 2009 18:10:56 +0200 writes:
[...]
PS ... I have
PS strong objections against the existing implementation of
as.character(),
{(because it is not *accurate*
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
PD I think that the real issue is that we actually do want almost-equal
PD numbers to be folded together.
yes, this now (revision 48469) will happen by default, using signif(x, 15)
where '15' is the default for the
MM == Martin Maechler maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch
on Tue, 5 May 2009 10:35:42 +0200 writes:
PD == Peter Dalgaard p.dalga...@biostat.ku.dk
on Mon, 04 May 2009 19:28:06 +0200 writes:
PD Petr Savicky wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:28:06PM +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
Petr Savicky wrote:
For this, we get
convert(0.3)
[1] 0.3
convert(1/3)
[1] 0. # 16 digits suffice
convert(0.12345)
[1] 0.12345
convert(0.12345678901234567)
[1]
PD == Peter Dalgaard p.dalga...@biostat.ku.dk
on Mon, 04 May 2009 19:28:06 +0200 writes:
PD Petr Savicky wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
[snip]
Let me quickly expand the tasks we have wanted to address, when
I started changing
Petr Savicky wrote:
Notice that the discrepancy comes from sums that really are identical
values (in decimal arithmetic), but where the binary FP inaccuracy makes
them slightly different.
[for a nice picture, continue the example with
tt - table(signif(zz,7))
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 11:27:36AM +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
I know. The point was rather that if you are not careful with rounding,
you get the some of the bars wrong (you get 2 or 3 small bars very close
to each other instead of one longer one). Computed p values from
permutation tests
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200 writes:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200 writes:
PS In R-2.10.0, the development version, function as.factor() uses 17 digit
PS precision for conversion of numeric
PD == Peter Dalgaard p.dalga...@biostat.ku.dk
on Mon, 04 May 2009 15:34:09 +0200 writes:
PD Martin Maechler wrote:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200 writes:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
[snip]
Let me quickly expand the tasks we have wanted to address, when
I started changing factor() for R-devel.
1) R-core had unanimously decided that R 2.10.0 should not allow
duplicated levels in factors anymore.
When
Petr Savicky wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
[snip]
Let me quickly expand the tasks we have wanted to address, when
I started changing factor() for R-devel.
1) R-core had unanimously decided that R 2.10.0 should not allow
duplicated levels in
Martin Maechler wrote:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200 writes:
PS == Petr Savicky savi...@cs.cas.cz
on Sun, 3 May 2009 22:32:04 +0200 writes:
PS In R-2.10.0, the development version, function as.factor() uses 17
digit
PS precision
24 matches
Mail list logo
