On 01/27/2015 02:54 AM, Bert Gunter wrote:
Huh??
ifelse(TRUE, a - 2L, a - 3L)
[1] 2
a
[1] 2
Please clarify.
In Bioconductor ifelse() is a generic function (with methods for Rle
objects) so all its arguments are evaluated before dispatch can
happen. You can reproduce with:
Hi,
Not sure if the following is what you look for:
x - c(1:10, NA, 12:20)
sum(x[!is.na(x)])
--
View this message in context:
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Sum-function-and-missing-values-need-to-mimic-SAS-sum-function-tp4702344p4702392.html
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at
Hi Martin,
On 01/26/2015 04:45 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Jim Lemon drjimle...@gmail.com
on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:21:03 +1100 writes:
Hi Allen, How about this:
sum_w_NA-function(x) ifelse(all(is.na(x)),NA,sum(x,na.rm=TRUE))
Excuse, Jim, but that's yet another horrible misuse
Huh??
ifelse(TRUE, a - 2L, a - 3L)
[1] 2
a
[1] 2
Please clarify.
-- Bert
Bert Gunter
Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
(650) 467-7374
Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
is certainly not wisdom.
Clifford Stoll
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Hervé
Maybe this is due to the usage of rep() in ifelse():
f.rep - function(ans){ans - rep(ans,1);return(ans)}
f - function(ans){return(ans)}
f(a - 123) # no print here
f.rep(a - 123) # prints:
# [1] 123
On 27 January 2015 at 11:54, Bert Gunter gunter.ber...@gene.com wrote:
Huh??
ifelse(TRUE, a -
Jim Lemon drjimle...@gmail.com
on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:21:03 +1100 writes:
Hi Allen, How about this:
sum_w_NA-function(x) ifelse(all(is.na(x)),NA,sum(x,na.rm=TRUE))
Excuse, Jim, but that's yet another horrible misuse of ifelse()
John Fox's reply *did* contain the proper
you can also define 'na.rm' in sum() by 'NA state' of x (where x is
your vector holding the data):
sum(x, na.rm=!all(is.na(x)))
On 26 January 2015 at 13:45, Martin Maechler
maech...@lynne.stat.math.ethz.ch wrote:
Jim Lemon drjimle...@gmail.com
on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:21:03 +1100 writes:
I'm a little puzzled by the assertion that the result is 0.0 when all the
elements are NA:
sum(NA)
[1] NA
sum(c(NA,NA))
[1] NA
sum(rep(NA, 10))
[1] NA
sum(as.numeric(letters[1:4]))
[1] NA
Warning message:
NAs introduced by coercion
Considering that the example snippet of code has several
In case anyone wonders, this behavior is expected and consistent with
the note the sum of an empty set is zero, by definition in
help(sum), i.e.
x - numeric(0)
str(x)
num(0)
sum(x)
[1] 0
Analogously, prod(numeric(0)) gives 1.0.
To OP, if you're in the end of the day is after the sample
Message-
From: Sven E. Templer [mailto:sven.temp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 6:56 AM
To: Martin Maechler
Cc: Jim Lemon; r-help mailing list; Allen Bingham
Subject: Re: [R] Sum function and missing values --- need to mimic SAS sum
function
you can also define 'na.rm' in sum
Try with na.rm=TRUE.
On Jan 26, 2015 4:04 PM, MacQueen, Don macque...@llnl.gov wrote:
I'm a little puzzled by the assertion that the result is 0.0 when all the
elements are NA:
sum(NA)
[1] NA
sum(c(NA,NA))
[1] NA
sum(rep(NA, 10))
[1] NA
sum(as.numeric(letters[1:4]))
[1] NA
.
Allen
-Original Message-
From: MacQueen, Don [mailto:macque...@llnl.gov]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 1:03 PM
To: Allen Bingham; r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] Sum function and missing values --- need to mimic SAS sum
function
I'm a little puzzled by the assertion that the result
On 27/01/15 13:42, Boris Steipe wrote:
sum(x, na.rm=!all(is.na(x)))
That's the kind of idiom that brings the poor chap who has to maintain it to
tears.
;-)
It looks perfectly lucid to me. If you think that that's obscure code,
you ain't been around! :-)
cheers,
Rolf Turner
--
sum(x, na.rm=!all(is.na(x)))
That's the kind of idiom that brings the poor chap who has to maintain it to
tears.
;-)
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read
Ouch. Please avoid ifelse() in non-vectorized contexts. John Fox has the right
idea.
-pd
On 26 Jan 2015, at 01:21 , Jim Lemon drjimle...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Allen,
How about this:
sum_w_NA-function(x) ifelse(all(is.na(x)),NA,sum(x,na.rm=TRUE))
Jim
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:21 AM,
Hi,
To those who pointed out my mistake, thanks. Using ifelse may not
return a sensible arithmetic sum.
Jim
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting
Hi Allen,
How about this:
sum_w_NA-function(x) ifelse(all(is.na(x)),NA,sum(x,na.rm=TRUE))
Jim
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Allen Bingham aebingh...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand that in order to get the sum function to ignore missing values
I need to supply the argument na.rm=TRUE.
I understand that in order to get the sum function to ignore missing values
I need to supply the argument na.rm=TRUE. However, when summing numeric
values in which ALL components are NA ... the result is 0.0 ... instead of
(what I would get from SAS) of NA (or in the case of SAS .).
Accordingly,
Dear Allen,
This seems reasonably straightforward to me, suggesting that I might not
properly understand what you want to do. How about something like the following?
mysum - function(...){
+ x - c(...)
+ if (all(is.na(x))) NA else sum(x, na.rm=TRUE)
+ }
mysum(1, 2, 3, NA)
[1] 6
19 matches
Mail list logo
