[Jeff Enos] >Below is a simple example calling split and unsplit on a numeric >vector of length 2 where 'f' is c(1,NA).
>> unsplit(split(c(1,2), c(1,NA)), c(1,NA)) >[1] 1 0 >I noticed that the call to vector in unsplit gives us 0 as the 2nd >element of the result. >Is this the intended result, as opposed to NA? ?unsplit says: 'unsplit' reverses the effect of 'split'. and later explains: 'unsplit' returns a vector for which 'split(x, f)' equals 'value' So some may argue that, while not necessarily intended, that this is at least not unintended :-). Yet, why "0" is chosen here, among a myriad of possibilities? "NA", as you suggest, might be a more neutral choice. -- François Pinard http://pinard.progiciels-bpi.ca ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel