Gabe,
> Also, I would expect the year 1e50 and the "year" Inf to be functionally
> equivalent in meaning (and largely meaningless) in context.
indeed.
thanks, Greg
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Greg,
I see what you mean, but on the other hand, that's not how we think about
real numbers working either, and doubles have that behavior generally. It
might be possible to put checks in (with a potentially non-trivial overhead
cost) to disallow that kind of thing, but again R (and everyone else
Martin, et al.,
> I think we should allow 'year' to be "double" instead, and so it
> could also be +Inf or -Inf and we'd nicely cover
> the conversions from and to 'numeric' -- which is really used
> internally for dates and date-times in POSIXct.
storing years as a double makes me worry slight
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 6:28 PM, Martin Maechler wrote:
>
> I think we should allow 'year' to be "double" instead, and so it
> could also be +Inf or -Inf and we'd nicely cover
> the conversions from and to 'numeric' -- which is really used
> internally for dates and date-times in POSIXct.
>
> Ma
x27; (because allow fractions!) are integer.
I think we should allow 'year' to be "double" instead, and so it
could also be +Inf or -Inf and we'd nicely cover
the conversions from and to 'numeric' -- which is really used
internally for dates and date-times in POSIXc
xx
}
With the following results:
> environment(print.Date) <- .GlobalEnv
> as.Date(Inf, origin='1970-01-01')
[1] "Date with numerical value Inf"
Warning message:
In format.Date(x) :
Some dates are not in the interval 01-01-01 and 9999-12-31, showing numerical
value.
Emil et al.,
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Emil Bode wrote:
> I don't think there's much wrong with is.na(as_date(Inf,
> origin='1970-01-01'))==FALSE, as there still is some "non-NA-ness" about
> the value (as difftime shows), but that the output when printing is
> confusing. The way cat is
I don't think there's much wrong with is.na(as_date(Inf,
origin='1970-01-01'))==FALSE, as there still is some "non-NA-ness" about the
value (as difftime shows), but that the output when printing is confusing. The
way cat is treating it is clearer: it does print Inf.
So would this be a solution?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Martin Maechler <
maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote:
>
> and a Date vector *is* atomic .. (so I'm confused about what
> that issue is .. but read one.
>
Indeed. I tend to exclude everything with a formal class from "atomic" (eg
factors et al) because they do beha
> Joris Meys
> on Sat, 9 Jun 2018 13:45:21 +0200 writes:
> And now I've seen I copied the wrong part of ?is.na
>> The default method for is.na applied to an atomic vector
>> returns a
> logical vector of the same length as its argument x,
> containing TRUE for thos
And now I've seen I copied the wrong part of ?is.na
> The default method for is.na applied to an atomic vector returns a
logical vector of the same length as its argument x, containing TRUE for
those elements marked NA or, for numeric or complex vectors, NaN, and FALSE
otherwise.
Key point being
Hi Werner,
on ?is.na it says:
> The default method for anyNA handles atomic vectors without a class and
NULL.
I hear you, and it is confusing to say the least. Looking deeper, the
culprit seems to be in the conversion of a Date to POSIXlt prior to the
formatting:
> x <- as.Date(Inf,origin = '19
Indeed. as_date is from lubridate, but the same holds for as.Date.
The output and it's interpretation should be consistent, otherwise it leads
to confusion when programming. I understand that the difference exists
after asking a question on Stack Overflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/q/50766089/91
> as_date
Error: object 'as_date' not found
Must be from some not-named package...
But don't confuse the format of an object when printed with its underlying
value:
> as.Date(Inf,origin = '1970-01-01')
[1] NA
> str(as.Date(Inf,origin = '1970-01-01'))
Date[1:1], format: NA
> as.numeric(as.Dat
In the following example, the date class shows Inf as NA
> as_date(Inf, origin = '1970-01-01')
[1] NA
This is misleading as is.na() reports incorrectly
> is.na(as_date(Inf, origin = '1970-01-01'))
[1] FALSE
The correct approach here would probably to have an Inf (and -Inf)
*displayed* rather th
15 matches
Mail list logo
