Nope. round() is not failsafe either. Basically, there is theoretically no
way to guarantee immunity to floating point error in conditional
comparisons. You need to either switch to integers -- which **are** exactly
represented -- or figure out another way.

Of course, practically speaking, sufficient rounding will work. It's just
that it **can** always break. ... and you know Murphy's first law.

-- Bert

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:54 PM, hamoreno <hamoreno@asu.edu> wrote:

> Thanks everyone... Seems that I will have to use round before seq to make
> sure everything has the correct precision.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Inconsistency-using-seq-tp4633739p4633750.html
> Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>



-- 

Bert Gunter
Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics

Internal Contact Info:
Phone: 467-7374
Website:
http://pharmadevelopment.roche.com/index/pdb/pdb-functional-groups/pdb-biostatistics/pdb-ncb-home.htm

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

