[Rd] R 4.4.2 scheduled for October 31
Full schedule is available on developer.r-project.org (pending update from SVN). -- Peter Dalgaard, Professor, Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark Phone: (+45)38153501 Office: A 4.23 Email: pd@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor variables
> -Original Message-
> From: Kurt Hornik
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 14:18
> To: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP)
> Cc: r-devel
> Subject: Re: [Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor
> variables
>
> > Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP) writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Just noticed that the error that arises when calling t.test() with factors
> could be a bit clearer:
>
> >> t.test(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)), factor(c(2,1,2,3,4,5)))
> > Error in var(x) : Calling var(x) on a factor x is defunct.
> > Use something like 'all(duplicated(x)[-1L])' to test for a constant
> > vector.
> > In addition: Warning message:
> > In mean.default(x) :
> > argument is not numeric or logical: returning NA
>
> > Obviously, using factors as input is nonsense, but this might happen on
> accident and then the error message could be a bit more on point. Similar for
> aov():
>
> >> aov(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)) ~ factor(c(2,1,2,2,2,1,2,1)))
> > Call:
> >aov(formula = factor(c(3, 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 5)) ~ factor(c(2,
> > 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1)))
> > Error in levels(x)[x] :
> > only 0's may be mixed with negative subscripts
> > In addition: Warning messages:
> > 1: In model.response(mf, "numeric") :
> > using type = "numeric" with a factor response will be ignored
> > 2: In Ops.factor(y, z$residuals) : '-' not meaningful for factors
>
> > Not a big deal and trying to catch all of the silly things users may
> > do is of course impossible, but for this one adding a check that the
> > (response) variable is actually numeric could be useful.
>
> Indeed.
>
> As always, the question is whether we want to give an error unless
> is.numeric, or ensure via as.numeric?
I would issue an error. Using as.numeric() could lead to totally nonsensical
results, for example when:
as.numeric(factor(c("low","high","mid")))
> Best
> -k
>
> > Best,
> > Wolfgang
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor variables
> Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP) writes:
Thanks. Patches welcome :-)
Best
-k
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kurt Hornik
>> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 14:18
>> To: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP)
>> Cc: r-devel
>> Subject: Re: [Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor
>> variables
>>
>> > Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP) writes:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > Just noticed that the error that arises when calling t.test() with factors
>> could be a bit clearer:
>>
>> >> t.test(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)), factor(c(2,1,2,3,4,5)))
>> > Error in var(x) : Calling var(x) on a factor x is defunct.
>> > Use something like 'all(duplicated(x)[-1L])' to test for a constant
>> > vector.
>> > In addition: Warning message:
>> > In mean.default(x) :
>> > argument is not numeric or logical: returning NA
>>
>> > Obviously, using factors as input is nonsense, but this might happen on
>> accident and then the error message could be a bit more on point. Similar for
>> aov():
>>
>> >> aov(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)) ~ factor(c(2,1,2,2,2,1,2,1)))
>> > Call:
>> >aov(formula = factor(c(3, 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 5)) ~ factor(c(2,
>> > 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1)))
>> > Error in levels(x)[x] :
>> > only 0's may be mixed with negative subscripts
>> > In addition: Warning messages:
>> > 1: In model.response(mf, "numeric") :
>> > using type = "numeric" with a factor response will be ignored
>> > 2: In Ops.factor(y, z$residuals) : '-' not meaningful for factors
>>
>> > Not a big deal and trying to catch all of the silly things users may
>> > do is of course impossible, but for this one adding a check that the
>> > (response) variable is actually numeric could be useful.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> As always, the question is whether we want to give an error unless
>> is.numeric, or ensure via as.numeric?
> I would issue an error. Using as.numeric() could lead to totally nonsensical
> results, for example when:
> as.numeric(factor(c("low","high","mid")))
>> Best
>> -k
>>
>> > Best,
>> > Wolfgang
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor variables
Hi all, Just noticed that the error that arises when calling t.test() with factors could be a bit clearer: > t.test(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)), factor(c(2,1,2,3,4,5))) Error in var(x) : Calling var(x) on a factor x is defunct. Use something like 'all(duplicated(x)[-1L])' to test for a constant vector. In addition: Warning message: In mean.default(x) : argument is not numeric or logical: returning NA Obviously, using factors as input is nonsense, but this might happen on accident and then the error message could be a bit more on point. Similar for aov(): > aov(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)) ~ factor(c(2,1,2,2,2,1,2,1))) Call: aov(formula = factor(c(3, 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 5)) ~ factor(c(2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1))) Error in levels(x)[x] : only 0's may be mixed with negative subscripts In addition: Warning messages: 1: In model.response(mf, "numeric") : using type = "numeric" with a factor response will be ignored 2: In Ops.factor(y, z$residuals) : '-' not meaningful for factors Not a big deal and trying to catch all of the silly things users may do is of course impossible, but for this one adding a check that the (response) variable is actually numeric could be useful. Best, Wolfgang -- Wolfgang Viechtbauer, PhD, Statistician | Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology | Maastricht University | PO Box 616 (VIJV1) | 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands | +31(43)3884170 | https://www.wvbauer.com __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Error message when calling t.test() and aov() with a factor variables
> Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP) writes: > Hi all, > Just noticed that the error that arises when calling t.test() with factors > could be a bit clearer: >> t.test(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)), factor(c(2,1,2,3,4,5))) > Error in var(x) : Calling var(x) on a factor x is defunct. > Use something like 'all(duplicated(x)[-1L])' to test for a constant vector. > In addition: Warning message: > In mean.default(x) : > argument is not numeric or logical: returning NA > Obviously, using factors as input is nonsense, but this might happen on > accident and then the error message could be a bit more on point. Similar for > aov(): >> aov(factor(c(3,1,2,4,3,5,4,5)) ~ factor(c(2,1,2,2,2,1,2,1))) > Call: >aov(formula = factor(c(3, 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 5)) ~ factor(c(2, > 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1))) > Error in levels(x)[x] : > only 0's may be mixed with negative subscripts > In addition: Warning messages: > 1: In model.response(mf, "numeric") : > using type = "numeric" with a factor response will be ignored > 2: In Ops.factor(y, z$residuals) : '-' not meaningful for factors > Not a big deal and trying to catch all of the silly things users may > do is of course impossible, but for this one adding a check that the > (response) variable is actually numeric could be useful. Indeed. As always, the question is whether we want to give an error unless is.numeric, or ensure via as.numeric? Best -k > Best, > Wolfgang > -- > Wolfgang Viechtbauer, PhD, Statistician | Department of Psychiatry and > Neuropsychology | Maastricht University | PO Box 616 (VIJV1) | 6200 MD > Maastricht, The Netherlands | +31(43)3884170 | https://www.wvbauer.com > __ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
