> Hardly a showstopper though; we're in timtowdi territory here and we're
> allowed a bit of personal preference.
Absolutely. I appreciate your constructive comments, however.
Cheers,
Bert
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and mo
> If you are concerned about missing levels -- which I agree is legitimate --
> then
> the following simple modification works (for
> **factors** of course):
>
> > d <- factor(letters[1:2],levels= letters[1:3]) d
> [1] a b
> Levels: a b c
> > f <- factor(d,levels = levels(d), labels = LETTERS[3:1
On 11 Oct 2016, at 01:32 , S Ellison wrote:
>> Well, I think that's kind of overkill.
> Depends whether you want to recode all or some, and how robust you want the
> answer to be.
> recode() allows you to recode a few levels of many, without dependence on
> level ordering; that's kind of neat
Still overkill, I believe.
" Unlike using the numeric levels, that doesn't fail if some of the
levels I expect are absent; it only fails (and does so visibly) when
there's a value in there that I haven't assigned a coding to. So it's
a tad more robust. "
If you are concerned about missing level
> Well, I think that's kind of overkill.
Depends whether you want to recode all or some, and how robust you want the
answer to be.
recode() allows you to recode a few levels of many, without dependence on level
ordering; that's kind of neat.
tbh, though, I don't use recode() a lot; I generall
Hi Margaret,
This may be a misunderstanding of your request, but what about:
mydata<-data.frame(oldvar=paste("topic",sample(1:9,20,TRUE),sep=""))
mydata$newvar<-sapply(mydata$oldvar,gsub,"topic.","parenttopic")
Jim
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:56 AM, MACDOUGALL Margaret
wrote:
> Hello
>
> The R c
Thank you for the valued suggestions in response to my query.
Margaret
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
-Original Message-
From: Fox, John [mailto:j...@mcmaster.ca]
Sent: 10 October 2016 20:32
To: MACDOUGA
Dear Margaret,
You've had one suggestion of an alternative for recoding variables, but in
addition your code is in error (see below).
> -Original Message-
> From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of
> MACDOUGALL Margaret
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 10:56 AM
> T
Well, I think that's kind of overkill.
Assuming "oldvar" is a factor in the data frame mydata, then the
following shows how to do it:
> set.seed(27)
> d <- data.frame(a = sample(c(letters[1:3],NA),15,replace = TRUE))
> d
a
1
2 a
3
4 b
5 a
6 b
7 a
8 a
9 a
10
Your code suggests that you do not understand R or what you are doing. The line
mydata$newvar[oldvar = "topic1"] <- "parenttopic"
does not recode cases where oldvar is "topic1", it creates a new variable
called oldvar (not the same as mydata$oldvar) and sets it to "topic1" because a
single equa
> Is there a convenient way to edit this code to allow me to recode a list of
> categories 'topic 1', 'topic 9' and 'topic 14', say, of the the old variable
> 'oldvar'
> as 'parenttopic' by means of the new variable 'newvar', while also mapping
> system missing values to system missing values?
Yo
11 matches
Mail list logo
