Wacek Kusnierczyk wrote:
>
> interestingly,
>
> as.complex('0i')
> # NA
>
but
as.complex('0+0i')
# 0+0i
so that while just 0i is valid as a complex literal, '0i' is not valid
as a string representing a complex. easy to learn and use. of course,
eval(parse(text='0i'))
Stavros Macrakis wrote:
> I agree that it's inconsistent that
> 1:'2' --> 1:2 # this doesn't seem to be documented in ? seq
> 1+ '2' --> error
> 1+factor(2) --> NA (with a warning)
> 1 : factor(4) --> 1 (uses as.numeric/unclass of factor)
>
>
>
>> ...i'd expect ...
Stavros Macrakis wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk <
> waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no> wrote:
>
>
>> ... there is an ugly lack of consistency here:...
>>
>>
>
> I agree that it's inconsistent that
>
> 1:'2' --> 1:2 # this doesn't seem to be documen
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Wacek Kusnierczyk <
waclaw.marcin.kusnierc...@idi.ntnu.no> wrote:
> ... there is an ugly lack of consistency here:...
>
I agree that it's inconsistent that
1:'2' --> 1:2 # this doesn't seem to be documented in ? seq
1+ '2' --> error
1+facto
i think the error message might be even better, but this would require
'* to be even better. i know some will take it for lamenting: there is
an ugly lack of consistency here:
1:2
# 1 2
1:2.5
# 1 2 (coercion double -> integer)
1:'2'
# 1 2 (corecion character -> integer)
Agreed, that's even better, e.g.
Error in 1 * "a" : character argument not allowed for arithmetic
operator *
For some reason (does anyone know the rationale?), in the case of factors,
you don't get an error, but a more explicit warning and an NA result:
> 2*factor(3)
[1] NA
Warning message:
I thought Stavros' suggestion was going
to be to have the error message say what
type of offending object was found. If
the message said that a list of class
'data.frame' was found (probably the leading
case), then that would be much more helpful.
Patrick Burns
patr...@burns-stat.com
+44 (0)20 8
What you need to do is to see that is in 'wekt_n_ok' at that point in your
program. You should be able to see it with str(wekt_n_ok) when the error
occurs. You can also add a print statement in the loop to print out the
value before it is used with the binary operator.
It would help if you provi
Thanks jholtman!
But I'm not sure what and where I should change my code... :(
wekt_n = ndf[i,]
wekt_n_ok = wekt_n[!is.na(wekt_n)]
If before this line I should change "wekt_n_ok" as numeric? but if I wrote
as.numeric(wekt_n_ok) it's also not correct
and I also don't understand why "wekt_n_ok
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:10 PM, jim holtman wrote:
> Message is very clear:
>
> > 1 * 'a'
> Error in 1 * "a" : non-numeric argument to binary operator
Though the user should have been able to figure this out, perhaps the error
message could be improved? After all, it is not the fact that the o
Message is very clear:
> 1 * 'a'
Error in 1 * "a" : non-numeric argument to binary operator
"wekt_n_ok " must be non-numeric. You need to provide a reproducible
script. You also need to learn about debugging. 'str(wekt_n_ok )' when the
error occurred may have helped to pinpoint the problem.
On
11 matches
Mail list logo
