On 05/04/2014 06:35 PM, Michael Friendly wrote:
On 03/05/2014 12:39 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the significance of 1954 is in R's NA?
Just ask R:
> 2*(1-pnorm(1954))
[1] 0
> 2*(1-pnorm(1954)) %in% NA
[1] 0
Not sure that would make the "joke" better, but you need pa
On 06 May 2014, at 01:05 , Hervé Pagès wrote:
>
> BTW, that %in% has precedence over arithmetic operations is surprising,
> error-prone, and doesn't cover any reasonable use case (who needs to
> multiply the logical vector returned by %in% by some value?) but that's
> another story:
The point
