Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

2011-08-15 Thread Gabor Grothendieck
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Giles  wrote:
> Thanks for that Gabor, it works fine from the development version
> you've pointed to.
>
> There is in addition a performance issue: the following benchmark ran
> in under 0.2s in the previous version, now consistently shows elapsed
> time over 14s on a Xeon with Windows.  It's unaffected if I use the
> development version.
>
> Giles Heywood
>
> #example
> system.time(rollmax(x= zoo(1:1,1:1),k=20,align="right"))
>
> R version 2.13.1 (2011-07-08)
> Platform: i386-pc-mingw32/i386 (32-bit)

Thanks for noticing that. It should now be fixed in the development version.


-- 
Statistics & Software Consulting
GKX Group, GKX Associates Inc.
tel: 1-877-GKX-GROUP
email: ggrothendieck at gmail.com

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

2011-08-15 Thread Giles
Thanks for that Gabor, it works fine from the development version
you've pointed to.

There is in addition a performance issue: the following benchmark ran
in under 0.2s in the previous version, now consistently shows elapsed
time over 14s on a Xeon with Windows.  It's unaffected if I use the
development version.

Giles Heywood

#example
system.time(rollmax(x= zoo(1:1,1:1),k=20,align="right"))

R version 2.13.1 (2011-07-08)
Platform: i386-pc-mingw32/i386 (32-bit)

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

2011-08-12 Thread Gabor Grothendieck
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Giles  wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm comparing output from rollapply.zoo, as produced by two versions
> of R and package zoo.  I'm illustrating with an example from a R-help
> posting 'Zoo - bug ???' dated 2010-07-13.
>
> My question is not about the first version, or the questions raised in
> that posting, because the behaviour is as documented.  I'm puzzled as
> to why na.rm no longer is passed to mean, i.e. why element 2 is NA and
> not 1.5 when na.rm=TRUE, as it was before.
>
> The first example, where na.rm is not specified, and which now behaves
> more as one might expect prior to carefully reading the documentation,
> is also different from before.
>
> This is not specific to mean(), similar behaviour is shown for e.g. sum().
>
> Have I misunderstood the documentation?  Is there a way to reproduce
> the old behaviour with na.rm=TRUE?

This is a bug. Its fixed in the development version.

Get the entire development version or just that one file:

library(zoo)
source("http://r-forge.r-project.org/scm/viewvc.php/*checkout*/pkg/zoo/R/rollapply.R?root=zoo";)
rollapply(a, FUN = mean, width = 3, na.rm = TRUE)

or use this workaround:
rollapply(a, FUN = function(x) mean(x, na.rm = TRUE),  width = 3)


-- 
Statistics & Software Consulting
GKX Group, GKX Associates Inc.
tel: 1-877-GKX-GROUP
email: ggrothendieck at gmail.com

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.


[R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

2011-08-12 Thread Giles
Hi.

I'm comparing output from rollapply.zoo, as produced by two versions
of R and package zoo.  I'm illustrating with an example from a R-help
posting 'Zoo - bug ???' dated 2010-07-13.

My question is not about the first version, or the questions raised in
that posting, because the behaviour is as documented.  I'm puzzled as
to why na.rm no longer is passed to mean, i.e. why element 2 is NA and
not 1.5 when na.rm=TRUE, as it was before.

The first example, where na.rm is not specified, and which now behaves
more as one might expect prior to carefully reading the documentation,
is also different from before.

This is not specific to mean(), similar behaviour is shown for e.g. sum().

Have I misunderstood the documentation?  Is there a way to reproduce
the old behaviour with na.rm=TRUE?

Thanks.

Giles

Version 1 --

R version 2.12.0 (2010-10-15)
Platform: i386-pc-mingw32/i386 (32-bit)
[27] zoo_1.6-4

> a <- zoo(c(NA,1:9),1:10)

> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3)
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3, na.rm = FALSE)
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9
NA  2  3  4  5  6  7  8
> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3, na.rm = TRUE)
  2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9
1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0


Version 2 --

R version 2.13.1 (2011-07-08)
Platform: i386-pc-mingw32/i386 (32-bit)
[25] zoo_1.7-2

> a <- zoo(c(NA,1:9),1:10)

> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3)
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9
NA  2  3  4  5  6  7  8
> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3, na.rm = FALSE)
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9
NA  2  3  4  5  6  7  8
> rollapply(a,FUN=mean,width=3, na.rm = TRUE)
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9
NA  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.