Hi,
I installed R 3.4.1 on Mac OSX 10.12.6 version.
On opening Preferences and trying to change the editor font by
clicking the select button I get following error message in R.
2017-08-28 11:57:41.551 R[809:11355] *** RController: caught ObjC
exception while processing system events. Update to
I have been trying to understand how the argument 'nmax' works in
'factor' function. R-Documentation states - "Since factors typically
have quite a small number of levels, for large vectors x it is helpful
to supply nmax as an upper bound on the number of unique values."
In the code below what is
What is the cause of the error below ?
> y <- 1
> y[1] <- NULL
Error in y[1] <- NULL : replacement has length zero
Thanks,
Ramnik
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
2017 at 4:15 PM, Rolf Turner <r.tur...@auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> On 20/05/17 22:42, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>
>> On 20/05/2017 6:39 AM, Rolf Turner wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/05/17 22:18, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On
Taking this question further.
If I use a complex number or a numeric as an operand in logical
operations, to me it APPEARS that these two types are first coerced to
LOGICAL internally and then THIS logical output is further used as the
operand.
For eg.
> x <- 4+5i; c(x & F, x & T, x | F, x | T)
Hi,
I need to understand the inconsistent behaviour of & and I operators when
used with NA.
The code below explains this inconsistency
> TRUE & NA
[1] NA
> FALSE & NA
[1] FALSE
> TRUE & NA
[1] NA
> FALSE | NA
[1] NA
> TRUE | NA
[1] TRUE
> TRUE == NA
[1] NA
> FALSE == NA
[1] NA
thing is returned, not even NULL
> >> for(i in 1:3) i
> > ## Ditto
> >
> >> z <- NULL
> >> z <- for(i in 1:3)i
> >> z
> > NULL ## still
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Bert
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
>
In the code below
*ff <- function(n){ for(i in 1:n) (i+1)}*
*n<-3;ff(n)->op;print(op)*
Why doesnt *print(op) * print 4 and instead prints NULL.
Isnt the last line of code executed is *i+1 * and therefore that should be
returned instead of NULL
instead if I say
*ff <- function(n){ (n+1) }*
I am not able to understand the output of the following lines of code.
*if(TRUE)(print("A"))*
Versus
*if(TRUE){print("A"))*
*In first case I get the ooutput as *
*>[1] "A"*
*>[1] "A"*
*Why does the first case print "A" twice *
*Why does it not happen with the statement
Hi,
The help file for function read.table mentions the default value for the
argument numerals as
c("allow.loss", "warn.loss", "no.loss")
How are the three values used as default values ?
Thanks
Ramnik
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Hi,
I am trying to understand under which specific conditions does explicit
coercion produce warnings.
> as.numeric(c(1, F, "b"))
[1] 1 NA NA
Warning message:
NAs introduced by coercion
> as.logical(c(1, F, "b"))
[1]NA FALSENA
In above examples, as.numeric produces warning but
Getting following error in using help.search
utils::help.search(linear models)
Error in help(db[i, topic], package = db[i, Package], lib.loc = lib, :
'topic' should be a name, length-one character vector or reserved word
example(help.search)
hlp.sr help.search(linear models)# In case
Thanks. But it seems to be an R 3.2.0 specific problem.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, David Winsemius dwinsem...@comcast.net
wrote:
On Jun 13, 2015, at 7:41 AM, Ramnik Bansal wrote:
Getting following error in using help.search
utils::help.search(linear models)
Error in help(db[i
13 matches
Mail list logo
