[Rd] documentation for rank() (PR#7298)
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Thu Oct 21 08:30:45 CEST 2004
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Douglas Grove wrote:
> Oh crap. So sorry. This is my fault (obviously).
> Prior to the new ties methods being added in 2.0.0
> I modified the source to do this myself. So looks
> like I forgot: (1) that my modified code was still
> being accessed default (thought I'd removed it) and
> (2) that I had added in the 'decreasing' argument.
> It did seem very odd to me when I saw the undocumented
> Sorry for the this faulty bug report.
> BTW, would someone please add a 'decreasing' argument to rank.
> It seems natural to have one, just like sort, and only
> involves about two lines of code and a few lines of
> editing to the help file.
I don't think so. At the very least, each tie method needs a change, as
may the handling of NAs. Also the writing a comprehensible help page will
become very complex.
What is the need? Rank works for numeric vectors, and why can't you just
call rank(-x) or n+1-rank(x)? The reason that does not work for sort() is
that it deals with non-numeric vectors.
Incidentally, we might need a `last' value for ties.method.
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
More information about the R-devel