[Rd] dgamma error condition?
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Tue Nov 8 08:44:41 CET 2005
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Ben Bolker wrote:
> There's an apparent inconsistency between the
> behavior of d(pqr)gamma and other distribution
> functions for "bad" parameter values. Specifically,
> most distributions give NaN and a warning for bad
> parameters (e.g. probabilities <0 or >1). In contrast,
> d(pqr)gamma actually gives an error and stops when shape<0.
> I don't see why it has to be this way -- the internal
> C code is set up to detect shape<0 (or scale<0) and
> return NaN and a warning, and none of the other
> distribution functions in that bit of the code have
> similar behavior.
> It would seem more consistent (and would be more
> convenient for me -- the error-instead-of-warning
> is making me have to jump through additional hoops)
> if dgamma just returned NaN and a warning.
> Any thoughts?
No one has come up with any, so let us remove the errors in R-devel.
Note that rgamma is not protected at C level: try rgamma(10, -2), or
(worse) rgamma(10, -20) after removing the stop() call.
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