Thank you.
I got the point with non-integer values in rep(). I also red FAQ 7.3:
"The only numbers that can be represented exactly in R’s numeric type
are integers and fractions whose denominator is a power of 2."
But then I still don't understand:
> for (b in seq(0.2,0.8,0.2))
+ {
+ a <- (1-b)*10
+
+ print(1-b,digits=20)
+ print(a,digits=22)
+ print(trunc(a))
+ print("///////")
+ }
[1] 0.80000000000000004441
[1] 8
[1] 8
[1] "///////"
[1] 0.5999999999999999778
[1] 6
[1] 6
[1] "///////"
[1] 0.39999999999999991118
[1] 3.999999999999999111822
[1] 3
[1] "///////"
[1] 0.19999999999999995559
[1] 1.999999999999999555911
[1] 1
[1] "///////"
Why are the first two yielding an integer after multiplying, and the
last two don't? Apparently, c(0.8,0.6,0.4,0.2) can't be represented exactly.
What would be your approach? Always round numbers first, before giving
them to rep() ?
Thanks,
Samuel
On 15.09.2014 18:36, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
On 15/09/2014 16:30, Samuel Knapp wrote:
Dear all,
I have discovered a bug in the standard rep() function: At certain
Not so:
> a <- (1-0.9)*100
> trunc(a)
[1] 9
As the help says
Non-integer values of ‘times’ will be truncated towards zero. If
‘times’ is a computed quantity it is prudent to add a small fuzz.
And as the posting guide said
Do your homework before posting:
...
Read the online help for relevant functions (type ?functionname,
e.g., ?prod, at the R prompt)
values, rep() does not replicate the element by the proper number of
times:
> a <- (1-0.9)*100
> a
[1] 10
> length(rep(1,times=a))
[1] 9
> length(rep(1,each=a))
[1] 9
As shown, this happens as well for the times= as for the each=
parameter. It does not depend on the kind of element that is to be
repeated:
> length(rep("abc",each=a))
[1] 9
I tried to narrow down the bug, but haven't really managed to find a
pattern behind the bug. Here is a list with values for a (see above)
that returns a false object ( after the value for a, i've collected the
expected length and the length that is produced by r):
# mistake at
(1-0.9)*100 10 9
(1-0.8)*100 20 19
(1-0.8)*1000 200 199
(1-0.9)*1000 100 99
(1-0.9)*10 1 0
(1-0.8)*10 2 1
(1-0.9)*1000000000 100000000 99999999
(2-1-0.9)*100 10 9
(10/10-0.9)*100 10 9
# the following sets for a work fine
(1+0.1)*100
(1-0.1)*100
(1-0.7)*100
(1-0.99)*1000
(1-0.7)*10
(1-0.90)*10
(1-0.95)*100
(1-0.95)*1000
(2-0.9)*1000
(2-1.9)*100
(1.1-1)*100
(10-9)*100
Did I make any mistake? Or where else should I address this problem?
Thanks and best regards,
Samuel
______________________________________________
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.
______________________________________________
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.
