> peter dalgaard
> on Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:39:27 +0100 writes:
> Well, "Basically, " is an excuse for not being
> accurate. Making the code more complex doesn't really help
> the explanation. It could be better to just add "(except
> for NA handling)" or so.
> -pd
Thanks again Michael, simple enough!
r1z <- r1
str(r1z$B1)
#Factor w/ 14 levels "Z","A","C","D",..: 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
# When you do your step of replacing lower case l with upper case L the
# level still stays in the factor even though it is empty. If that is a nuisance
r1z$B1 <- factor(r1z
Hi Jeff and Michael, thank you for your quick responses and suggestions I will
try them out.
Appreciate everyone's time!
WHP
My suggestion is to avoid converting the column to a factor until it is cleaned
up the way you want it. There is also the forcats package, but I still prefer
to work
Thank you Bert.
WHP
As usual, careful reading of the relevant Help page would resolve the confusion.
from ?factor:
"factor(x, exclude = NULL) applied to a factor without NAs is a
no-operation unless there are unused levels: in that case, a factor
with the reduced level set is returned. If excl
My suggestion is to avoid converting the column to a factor until it is cleaned
up the way you want it. There is also the forcats package, but I still prefer
to work with character data for cleaning. The stringsAsFactors=FALSE argument
to read.table and friends helps with this.
On November 16,
Dear Bill
When you do your step of replacing lower case l with upper case L the
level still stays in the factor even though it is empty. If that is a
nuisance x <- factor(x) will drop the unused levels. There are other
ways of doing this.
Michael
On 16/11/2018 15:38, Bill Poling wrote:
Hel
As usual, careful reading of the relevant Help page would resolve the confusion.
from ?factor:
"factor(x, exclude = NULL) applied to a factor without NAs is a
no-operation unless there are unused levels: in that case, a factor
with the reduced level set is returned. If exclude is used, since R
ve
Hello:
I am running windows 10 -- R3.5.1 -- RStudio Version 1.1.456
I would like to know why when I replace a column value it still appears in
subsequent routines:
My example:
r1$B1 is a Factor: It is created from the first character of a list of CPT
codes, r1$CPT.
head(r1$CPT, N= 25)
[1] A4
For almost 10 years, Microsoft staff and guests have written about R at the
Revolutions blog (http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com) and every month I post a
summary of articles from the previous month of particular interest to readers of
r-help.
In case you missed them, here are some articles relat
Well, "Basically, " is an excuse for not being accurate. Making the code more
complex doesn't really help the explanation. It could be better to just add
"(except for NA handling)" or so.
-pd
> On 16 Nov 2018, at 11:08 , buzon informatica, ige
> wrote:
>
> The which() function help page s
The which() function help page states that, in the default case, what the
function returns is:
" Basically, the result is (1:length(x))[x]."
That would only be true if there are not any NA values in x. I think it would
be more accurate to say:
"Basically, the result is (1:length(x))[!is.na(x) &
11 matches
Mail list logo
