[Rd] Should as.complex(NaN) -> NA?
Charles C. Berry
cberry at tajo.ucsd.edu
Thu Apr 1 00:52:35 CEST 2010
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, William Dunlap wrote:
> I'm having trouble grokking complex NaN's.
> This first set examples using complex(re=NaN,im=NaN)
> give what I expect
> > Re(complex(re=NaN, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> > Im(complex(re=NaN, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> > Arg(complex(re=NaN, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> > Mod(complex(re=NaN, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> > abs(complex(re=NaN, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> and so do the following
> > Re(complex(re=1, im=NaN))
> [1] 1
> > Im(complex(re=1, im=NaN))
> [1] NaN
> > Re(complex(re=NaN, im=1))
> [1] NaN
> > Im(complex(re=NaN, im=1))
> [1] 1
> but I don't have a good mental model that explains
> why the following produce NA instead of NaN.
Just a guess here:
> as.complex(sqrt(as.complex(-1)))
[1] 0+1i
> as.complex(sqrt(-1))
[1] NA
Warning message:
In sqrt(-1) : NaNs produced
It protects from assuming that the latter truly is not a number.
Chuck
> > as.complex(NaN)
> [1] NA
> > Im(complex(modulus=NaN, argument=NaN))
> [1] NA
> > Re(complex(modulus=NaN, argument=NaN))
> [1] NA
> > Re(1i * NaN)
> [1] NA
> > Im(1i * NaN)
> [1] NA
> > Re(NaN + 1i)
> [1] NA
> > Im(NaN + 1i)
> [1] NA
>
> It may be that if as.complex(NaN), and its C equivalent,
> were changed to return complex(re=NaN,im=NaN) then the
> arithmetic examples would return NaN. Is there a
> better way for me to model how NaN's in complex numbers
> should work or is this a bug?
>
> While I was looking into this I noticed a bug in str():
> > str(NA_complex_)
> Error in FUN(X[[1L]], ...) : subscript out of bounds
>
> Bill Dunlap
> Spotfire, TIBCO Software
> wdunlap tibco.com
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
Charles C. Berry (858) 534-2098
Dept of Family/Preventive Medicine
E mailto:cberry at tajo.ucsd.edu UC San Diego
http://famprevmed.ucsd.edu/faculty/cberry/ La Jolla, San Diego 92093-0901
More information about the R-devel
mailing list