a strange logical bug (PR#162)

[Arne Kovac]

On Fri, 9 Apr 1999 maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch wrote:

> oh dear;  and we had thought we would clean up the ISNAN definition and
> do_isna[n] functions....

I'm not sure if this fits into the discussion on do_isna, but can anybody
explain to me the following output from R-0.64.0 under AIX:

> NA
[1] NA
> NaN
[1]NaNQ
> par()$tck 
[1]NaNS

What's that? 

Arne

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._