It does remind me of counting on one's fingers, though.
Jim
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 4:38 PM Bert Gunter wrote:
>
But c(x[-1], x[1]) is, which is not so terrible, after all...
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https:
Inline...
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 9:22 PM Richard O'Keefe wrote:
> More accurately, in x[i] where x and i are simple vectors,
> i may be a mix of positive integers and zeros
> where the zeros contribute nothing to the result
> or it may be a MIX of negative integers and zeros
> where the ze
More accurately, in x[i] where x and i are simple vectors,
i may be a mix of positive integers and zeros
where the zeros contribute nothing to the result
or it may be a MIX of negative integers and zeros
where the zeros contribute nothing to the result
and -k means "do not include element k".
Jim and Bert,
Thank you for your help. It was an indexing problem. I was able to solve it
by changing the split line to: clusters <- split(seq_len(nrow(dd)),
dd$cluster).
Thank you.
Best,
Chao
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jim Lemon wrote:
> Hi Chao,
> You have discovered one of the surpri
Hi Chao,
You have discovered one of the surprising things about the extraction
operator "[". It expects to get an object consisting of integers (like
1,2,3,...) or logical values (TRUE,FALSE or 0,1). As you have passed
the _values_ of your cluster, it can't deal with the negative numbers
as they do
As the error message says, move the '+' sign from the start of the second
line to the end of the preceding line.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 10:29 PM Rosato, Kyle wrote:
> For some simple reason, I am unable to see the mistake:
>
> ggplot(filter(nlsw88, !(is.na(union))), aes(y = wage, x = union, fi
For some simple reason, I am unable to see the mistake:
ggplot(filter(nlsw88, !(is.na(union))), aes(y = wage, x = union, fill = union))
+ geom_boxplot() + facet_wrap(~idblack)
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing
Sorry, forgot to link the actual vignette:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/dotwhisker/vignettes/dotwhisker-vignette.html
In fact the vignette states:
dwplot(m1_df) #same as dwplot(m1)
where m1_df is m1_df <- tidy(m1)
They are not the same in either the vignette itself or on my computer.
Hello,
I'm reading this and one part is confusing me (the most ;-)
library(dotwhisker)
library(broom)
library(dplyr)
m1 <- lm(mpg ~ wt + cyl + disp + gear, data = mtcars)
# Please compare:
dwplot(m1)
dwplot(tidy(m1))
Why is the dwplot of tidy(m1) so different from the dwplot of m1?
I had thou
1. Thanks for the example.
2. Good opportunity to learn (more) about debugging in R. See ?debug or
?browser()
3. Hint: what do you think ... unlist(clusters[... gives? (you are using
it as an index for subscripting dd)
Cheers,
Bert
Bert Gunter
"The trouble with having an open mind is that peop
Hi,
I was trying to do a cluster sampling but came across this error: Error in
xj[i] : only 0's may be mixed with negative subscripts. What is the cause
and how to get around? Thank you for your help!
Here is the code:
#simulate some data
y <- rnorm(20)
x <- rnorm(20)
z <- rep(1:5, 4)
w <- rep(1
11 matches
Mail list logo
