Re: [R] Surprising behavior using seq()

2010-11-15 Thread P Ehlers
Vadim Patsalo wrote: Patrick and Bert, Thank you both for you replies to my question. I see how my naïve expectations fail to floating point arithmetic. However, I still believe there is an underlying problem. It seems to me that when asked, c(7.7, 7.8, 7.9) %in% seq(4, 8, by=0.1) [1] TRUE

Re: [R] Surprising behavior using seq()

2010-11-15 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 15/11/2010 9:24 AM, Vadim Patsalo wrote: Patrick and Bert, Thank you both for you replies to my question. I see how my naïve expectations fail to floating point arithmetic. However, I still believe there is an underlying problem. It seems to me that when asked, > c(7.7, 7.8, 7.9) %in% se

Re: [R] Surprising behavior using seq()

2010-11-15 Thread Vadim Patsalo
Patrick and Bert, Thank you both for you replies to my question. I see how my naïve expectations fail to floating point arithmetic. However, I still believe there is an underlying problem. It seems to me that when asked, > c(7.7, 7.8, 7.9) %in% seq(4, 8, by=0.1) > [1] TRUE FALSE TRUE R shou

Re: [R] Surprising behavior using seq()

2010-11-12 Thread Bert Gunter
Not weird at all!!! You need to understand how computers do arithmetic. See R FAQ 7.31. -- Bert On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Vadim Patsalo wrote: > Hello R-help, > > I noticed the following surprising behavior when using %in% to find elements > in a vector generated using seq(). > > # weird

[R] Surprising behavior using seq()

2010-11-12 Thread Vadim Patsalo
Hello R-help, I noticed the following surprising behavior when using %in% to find elements in a vector generated using seq(). # weird!!! > c(7.7, 7.8, 7.9) %in% seq(4, 8, by=0.1) [1] TRUE FALSE TRUE # OK now > c(7.7, 7.8, 7.9) %in% round(seq(4, 8, by=0.1), 1) [1] TRUE TRUE TRUE # wait, how