The current behavior is as documented. See ?NA, which says
"Numerical computations using ‘NA’ will normally result in ‘NA’: a
possible exception is where ‘NaN’ is also involved, in which case
either might result"
--Ista
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:25 AM, Jan Gorecki <j.gore...@wit.edu.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
> base::mean is not consistent in terms of handling NA/NaN.
> Mean should not depend on order of its arguments while currently it is.
>
> mean(c(NA, NaN))
> #[1] NA
> mean(c(NaN, NA))
> #[1] NaN
>
> I created issue so in case of no replies here status of it can be looked up
> at:
> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17441
>
> Best,
> Jan
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
