[R] Inconsistency of 1^NA=1 vs. 1.1^NA=NA

Thierry Onkelinx thierry.onkelinx at inbo.be
Thu Nov 17 20:54:12 CET 2016

Dear Da,

NA represents an unknown value x. 1 ^ x = 1 for all possible values of x.
Hence 1 ^ NA = 1.

Best regards,

ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature and
team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / team Biometrics & Quality Assurance
Kliniekstraat 25
1070 Anderlecht

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

2016-11-17 20:19 GMT+01:00 Da Zheng <zhengda1936 op gmail.com>:

> Hello,
> I just realized that 1^NA outputs 1 while 1.1^NA outputs NA in R v3.3.1 and
> R v3.2.3.
> I tried other values such as 0^NA and 2^NA, and they all output NA.
> I don't understand this inconsistency here. Shouldn't 1^NA output NA as
> well? Why does R handle it differently? Or is this a bug in these
> particular versions of R?
> Thanks,
> Da
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> ______________________________________________
> R-help op r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

More information about the R-help mailing list