How do people even notice stuff like this. You would never hard-coding (-2)^2 or -2^2 anyway. The part being squared would be a variable, in which case it works correctly:
> a<- -2 > a [1] -2 > a^2 [1] 4 Sometimes it seems that people go looking for bugs... and therefore see bugs all around them. On 1/6/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 1/6/06, Thomas Lumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > hi - in version 2.1 the command > > > > > > >-2^2 > > > > > > gives > > > > > > -4 > > > > > > as the answer. (-2)^2 is evaluated correctly. > > > > So is -2^2. The precedence of ^ is higher than that of unary minus. It > > may be surprising, but it *is* documented and has been in S for a long > > time. > > See ?Syntax > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
