[Rd] There is pmin and pmax each taking na.rm, how about psum?

[Matthew Dowle]

Because that's inconsistent with pmin and pmax when two NAs are summed.

x = c(1,3,NA,NA,5)
y = c(2,NA,4,NA,1)
colSums(rbind(x, y), na.rm = TRUE)
[1] 3 3 4 0 6    # actual
[1] 3 3 4 NA 6   # desired

and it would be less convenient/natural (and slower) than a psum which
would call .Internal(psum(na.rm,...)) in the same way as pmin and pmax.

> Why don't you make a matrix and use colSums or rowSums?
>
> x = c(1,3,NA,5)
> y = c(2,NA,4,1)
> colSums(rbind(x, y), na.rm = TRUE)
>
>
> ir. Thierry Onkelinx
> Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature and
> Forest
> team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / team Biometrics & Quality Assurance
> Kliniekstraat 25
> 1070 Anderlecht
> Belgium
> + 32 2 525 02 51
> + 32 54 43 61 85
> Thierry.Onkelinx at inbo.be
> www.inbo.be
>
> To call in the statistician after the experiment is done may be no more
> than asking him to perform a post-mortem examination: he may be able to
> say what the experiment died of.
> ~ Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher
>
> The plural of anecdote is not data.
> ~ Roger Brinner
>
> The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not
> ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of
> data.
> ~ John Tukey
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org]
> Namens Matthew Dowle
> Verzonden: dinsdag 30 oktober 2012 12:03
> Aan: r-devel at r-project.org
> Onderwerp: [Rd] There is pmin and pmax each taking na.rm, how about psum?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Please consider the following :
>
> x = c(1,3,NA,5)
> y = c(2,NA,4,1)
>
> min(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)    # ok
> [1] 1
> max(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)    # ok
> [1] 5
> sum(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)    # ok
> [1] 16
>
> pmin(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)   # ok
> [1] 1 3 4 1
> pmax(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)   # ok
> [1] 2 3 4 5
> psum(x,y,na.rm=TRUE)
> [1] 3 3 4 6                             # expected result
> Error: could not find function "psum"   # actual result
>
> I realise that + is already like psum, but what about NA?
>
> x+y
> [1]  3 NA NA  6        # can't supply `na.rm=TRUE` to `+`
>
> Is there a case to add psum? Or have I missed something.
>
> This question survived when I asked on Stack Overflow :
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13123638/there-is-pmin-and-pmax-each-taking-na-rm-why-no-psum
>
> And a search of the archives found that has Gabor has suggested it too as
> an aside :
> http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/How-to-do-it-without-for-loops-tp794745p794750.html
>
> If someone from R core is willing to sponsor the idea, I am willing to
> write, test and submit the code for psum. Implemented in a very similar
> fashion to pmin and pmax.  Or perhaps it exists already in a package
> somewhere (I searched but didn't find it).
>
> Matthew
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * D I S C L A I M E R * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> Dit bericht en eventuele bijlagen geven enkel de visie van de schrijver
> weer en binden het INBO onder geen enkel beding, zolang dit bericht niet
> bevestigd is door een geldig ondertekend document.
> The views expressed in this message and any annex are purely those of the
> writer and may not be regarded as stating an official position of INBO, as
> long as the message is not confirmed by a duly signed document.
>