On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Robin Hankin wrote: > Hello > > got it: > > o The printing of complex numbers has changed, handling numbers > as a whole rather than in two parts. So both real and > imaginary parts are shown to the same accuracy, with the > 'digits' parameter referring to the accuracy of the larger > component, and both components are shown in fixed or > scientific notation (unless one is entirely zero when it is > always shown in fixed notation). > > [this from the NEWS of R-2.2.0] > > I'm struggling to reconcile the final clause of this with: > > >> 1e100 + 1i > [1] 1e+100+1i >> 1e100 + 1e-100i > [1] 1e+100+0i > > > in both of these cases, the real component is shown in scientific > notation and the imaginary component isn't. > > I'm finding the following example confusing too: > >> 1e100 + pi*1i*10^(c(-100,0,1,40,100)) > [1] 1e+100+3.1416e-100i 1e+100+ 3.1416e+00i 1e+100+ 3.1416e+01i > [4] 1e+100+ 3.1416e+40i 1e+100+3.1416e+100i
Yes, there is a bug here, but I think only for cases where what is printed should be zero, that is for complex numbers with very different magnitudes of real and imaginary parts. A better version would be > 1e100 + 1i [1] 1e+100+0e+00i > 1e100 + 1e-100i [1] 1e+100+0e+00i > 1e100 + pi*1i*10^(c(-100,0,1,40,100)) [1] 1e+100+ 0.000000e+00i 1e+100+ 0.000000e+00i 1e+100+ 0.000000e+00i [4] 1e+100+ 0.000000e+00i 1e+100+3.141593e+100i > 1e50 + c(0, 1, 1e48)*1i [1] 1e+50+0e+00i 1e+50+0e+00i 1e+50+1e+48i > 1e50 + pi^-(1:5)*1e46*1i [1] 1e+50+3.2e+45i 1e+50+1.0e+45i 1e+50+3.2e+44i 1e+50+1.0e+44i 1e+50+0.0e+00i which is what R-devel now gives. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
