Re: [R] efficient test for missing values (NAs)

2010-10-20 Thread Ali Tofigh 
A small test indicates that the following may be the fastest method
(although all are pretty fast)

has.na <- !all(complete.cases(x))

Thanks Jim and Phil for your suggestions.
/Ali

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 19:03, Jim Holtman  wrote:
> ?complete.cases
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 18:53, Ali Tofigh  wrote:
>
>> What is the best way to detect whether or not a (potentially large)
>> matrix contains missing values (NAs) or not? I use
>>
>> if (sum(is.na(x)) > 0) {...}
>>
>> are there more efficient ways?
>>
>> /Ali
>>
>> __
>> 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-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] efficient test for missing values (NAs)

2010-10-20 Thread Jim Holtman 

?complete.cases

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2010, at 18:53, Ali Tofigh  wrote:


What is the best way to detect whether or not a (potentially large)
matrix contains missing values (NAs) or not? I use

if (sum(is.na(x)) > 0) {...}

are there more efficient ways?

/Ali

__
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-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] efficient test for missing values (NAs)

2010-10-20 Thread Phil Spector 

Ali -
  If all you care about is if there are any missing values
(not how many or where they are), I think it would be a bit
faster to use

  if(any(is.na(x))){...}

- Phil Spector
 Statistical Computing Facility
 Department of Statistics
 UC Berkeley
 spec...@stat.berkeley.edu



On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Ali Tofigh wrote:


What is the best way to detect whether or not a (potentially large)
matrix contains missing values (NAs) or not? I use

if (sum(is.na(x)) > 0) {...}

are there more efficient ways?

/Ali

__
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-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.