Hi, Here are two possible ways to deal with it. Which is better depends on the larger context of your code. There's no right way, just whichever is more convenient.
> ifelse(var2 != 0, var1/var2, 0) [1] 0.00000 13.88889 53.79000 0.00000 150.00000 350.00000 > > newvar <- var1/var2 > newvar[is.nan(newvar)] <- 0 > newvar [1] 0.00000 13.88889 53.79000 0.00000 150.00000 350.00000 > Sarah On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jennifer Sabatier <plessthanpointohf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > > > I have some data where I am doing fairly simple calculations, nothing more > than adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing. > > > > I’m running into a problem when I divide one variable by another and when > they’re both 0 I get NaN. I realize that if you divide a non-zero by 0 then > you get Inf, which is, of course, correct. But in my case I never get Inf, > just NaN because of the structure of my dataset. > > > > Here’s a dumb example: > > > > var1 <- c(0, 500, 5379, 0, 1500, 1750) > > var2 <- c(0, 36, 100, 0, 10, 5) > > > > var1/var2 > > > > > > I realize the NaNs are logical, but for my purposes this should just be 0 > because I am calculating expenditures and if you spent no money in one > sub-area and none in the whole area then you don't have an expenditure at > all, so it should be 0. And since R doesn't like adding NA's or NaN's to > anything, I'd rather just have this be 0 so that my future calculations, > such as adding up expenditure, is simple. > > > Is there an easy way to avoid the NaN's, something a non-programmer (ie, > the person I am handing this code off to) would understand? > > > Thanks, > > > Jen > -- Sarah Goslee http://www.functionaldiversity.org ______________________________________________ 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.
