>> %<% would extend the vocabulary established by %in%, and work in the same
>> situations.
>> e.g.
>> # only set “flynnEffect" for people known to be under 12, not for people
>> where age is NA
>> twinData[twinData$Age %<% 12, "flynnEffect"] = FALSE
>> Addressing Duncan's point about returning a logical array... the %<%
>> function should be:
>>
>> "%<%"<- function(table, x){
>> lessThan = table< x
>> lessThan[is.na(lessThan)] = FALSE
>> return(lessThan)
>> }
>
> I think that still doesn't work quite right. You want the conversion of NA
> to FALSE to happen as the last
> part of evaluating an expression, not in intermediate steps. Otherwise:
> !(a %<% 10)
> will give TRUE for NA values, which may not be as intended, if your
> intention was to skip NA cases.
Yes, so that would be by design: just as !(1 %in% NA) returns TRUE, whereas
!(1 == NA).
______________________________________________
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.
