I see the problem on both Linux and Windows, R-3.0.1.
> vapply(as.numeric(9994:9995), function(x)format(x, scientific=FALSE,
digits=3), "")
[1] "9994" " 9995"
> vapply(as.numeric(99994:99995), function(x)format(x, scientific=FALSE,
digits=4), "")
[1] "99994" " 99995"
> vapply(as.numeric(999994:999995), function(x)format(x, scientific=FALSE,
digits=5), "")
[1] "999994" " 999995"
The ones with the initial space are the ones that would round up to the next
power of 10 when
rounded to the requested number of significant digits:
> x <- as.numeric(1:5e5)
> z <- vapply(x, function(x)format(x, scientific=FALSE, digits=3), "")
> i <- grep(" ", z)
> z[i]
[1] " 9995" " 9996" " 9997" " 9998" " 9999" " 99950" " 99951" " 99952"
[9] " 99953" " 99954" " 99955" " 99956" " 99957" " 99958" " 99959" " 99960"
[17] " 99961" " 99962" " 99963" " 99964" " 99965" " 99966" " 99967" " 99968"
[25] " 99969" " 99970" " 99971" " 99972" " 99973" " 99974" " 99975" " 99976"
[33] " 99977" " 99978" " 99979" " 99980" " 99981" " 99982" " 99983" " 99984"
[41] " 99985" " 99986" " 99987" " 99988" " 99989" " 99990" " 99991" " 99992"
[49] " 99993" " 99994" " 99995" " 99996" " 99997" " 99998" " 99999"
> print(x[i], digits=3)
[1] 1e+04 1e+04 1e+04 1e+04 1e+04 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05
[13] 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05
[25] 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05
[37] 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05
[49] 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05 1e+05
Bill Dunlap
Spotfire, TIBCO Software
wdunlap tibco.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Mathieu Basille
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 8:31 AM
> To: R help
> Subject: Re: [R] 'format' behaviour in a 'apply' call depending on
> 'options(digits = K)'
>
> This problem does not seem to be widely popular, but at least affects two
> users (both on Linux, maybe a hint here?). To me, it looks like a bug (is
> it a R bug, or a OS-related bug, I don't know). Should I forward it to
> R-devel, or some other place where R gurus may have a chance to look at it?
>
> Mathieu.
>
>
> Le 07/30/2013 02:34 PM, arun a écrit :
> > Hi Mathieu
> > yes, the original problem occurs in my system too. I am using R 3.0.1 on
> > linux mint 15. I
> guess the default case would be trim=FALSE, but still it looks very strange
> especially in
> ?apply(), as it starts from " 99995" onwards.
> >
> > sessionInfo()
> > R version 3.0.1 (2013-05-16)
> > Platform: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (64-bit)
> >
> > locale:
> > [1] LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 LC_NUMERIC=C
> > [3] LC_TIME=en_CA.UTF-8 LC_COLLATE=en_CA.UTF-8
> > [5] LC_MONETARY=en_CA.UTF-8 LC_MESSAGES=en_CA.UTF-8
> > [7] LC_PAPER=C LC_NAME=C
> > [9] LC_ADDRESS=C LC_TELEPHONE=C
> > [11] LC_MEASUREMENT=en_CA.UTF-8 LC_IDENTIFICATION=C
> >
> > attached base packages:
> > [1] stats graphics grDevices utils datasets methods base
> >
> > other attached packages:
> > [1] stringr_0.6.2 reshape2_1.2.2
> >
> > loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
> > [1] plyr_1.8 tools_3.0.1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Mathieu Basille <basille....@ase-research.org>
> > To: arun <smartpink...@yahoo.com>
> > Cc: R help <r-help@r-project.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 2:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [R] 'format' behaviour in a 'apply' call depending on
> > 'options(digits = K)'
> >
> > Thanks Arun for your answer. 'trim = TRUE' does indeed solve the symptoms
> > of the problem, and this is the solution I'm currently using. However, it
> > does not help to understand what the problem is, and what is the cause of
> > it.
> >
> > Can you confirm that the original problem also occurs on your computer (and
> > what is your OS)? It would be interesting since David is not able to
> > reproduce the problem with Mac OS X.
> > Mathieu.
> >
> >
> > Le 07/30/2013 02:15 PM, arun a écrit :
> >> Hi,
> >> Try using trim=TRUE, in ?format()
> >> options(digits=4)
> >>
> >> df2 <- data.frame(x = rnorm(110000), y = rnorm(110000), id = 1:110000)
> >> df2$id2 <- apply(df2, 1, function(dfi) format(dfi["id"],
> >> trim=TRUE,scientific = FALSE))
> >> df2$id2[99990:100010]
> >> # [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >> "99997"
> >> # [9] "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003" "100004"
> >> "100005"
> >> #[17] "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>
> >>
> >> id2 <- format(1:110000, scientific = FALSE,trim=TRUE)
> >> id2[99990:100010]
> >> # [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >> "99997"
> >> #[9] "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003" "100004"
> >> "100005"
> >> #[17] "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >> A.K.
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Mathieu Basille <basille....@ase-research.org>
> >> To: David Winsemius <dwinsem...@comcast.net>
> >> Cc: r-help@r-project.org
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 2:07 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [R] 'format' behaviour in a 'apply' call depending on
> >> 'options(digits = K)'
> >>
> >> Thanks David for your interest. I have to admit that your answer puzzles me
> >> even more than before. It seems that the underlying problem is way beyond
> >> my R skills...
> >>
> >> The generation of id2 is indeed quite demanding, especially compared to a
> >> simple 'as.character' call. Anyway, since it seems to be system specific,
> >> here is the sessionInfo() that I forgot to attach to my first message:
> >>
> >> R version 3.0.1 (2013-05-16)
> >> Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (64-bit)
> >>
> >> locale:
> >> [1] LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 LC_NUMERIC=C
> >> [3] LC_TIME=fr_FR.UTF-8 LC_COLLATE=fr_FR.UTF-8
> >> [5] LC_MONETARY=fr_FR.UTF-8 LC_MESSAGES=fr_FR.UTF-8
> >> [7] LC_PAPER=C LC_NAME=C
> >> [9] LC_ADDRESS=C LC_TELEPHONE=C
> >> [11] LC_MEASUREMENT=fr_FR.UTF-8 LC_IDENTIFICATION=C
> >>
> >> attached base packages:
> >> [1] stats graphics grDevices utils datasets methods base
> >>
> >> In brief: last stable R available under Debian Testing... Hopefully this
> >> can help tracking down the problem.
> >> Mathieu.
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 07/30/2013 01:58 PM, David Winsemius a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Mathieu Basille wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear list,
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is a simple example in which the behaviour of 'format' does not
> >>>> make sense to
> me. I have read the documentation and searched the archives, but nothing
> pointed me in
> the right direction to understand this behaviour. Let's start with a simple
> data frame:
> >>>>
> >>>> df1 <- data.frame(x = rnorm(110000), y = rnorm(110000), id = 1:110000)
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's now create a new variable 'id2' which is the character
> >>>> representation of 'id'.
> Note that I use 'scientific = FALSE' to ensure that long numbers such as
> 100,000 are not
> formatted using their scientific representation (in this case 1e+05):
> >>>>
> >>>> df1$id2 <- apply(df1, 1, function(dfi) format(dfi["id"], scientific =
> >>>> FALSE))
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's have a look at part of the result:
> >>>>
> >>>> df1$id2[99990:100010]
> >>>> [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >>>> [8] "99997" "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003"
> >>>> [15] "100004" "100005" "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>
> >>> Some formating processes are carried out by system functions. In this
> >>> case I am
> unable to reproduce with the same code on a Mac OS 10.7.5/R 3.0.1 Patched
> >>>
> >>>> df1$id2[99990:100010]
> >>> [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >>> "99997"
> >>> [9] "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003" "100004"
> >>> "100005"
> >>> [17] "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>
> >>> (I did notice that generation of the id2 variable seemed to take an
> >>> inordinately long
> time.)
> >>>
> >>> -- David.
> >>>>
> >>>> So far, so good. Let's now play with the 'digits' option:
> >>>>
> >>>> options(digits = 4)
> >>>> df2 <- data.frame(x = rnorm(110000), y = rnorm(110000), id = 1:110000)
> >>>> df2$id2 <- apply(df2, 1, function(dfi) format(dfi["id"], scientific =
> >>>> FALSE))
> >>>> df2$id2[99990:100010]
> >>>> [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" " 99995" " 99996"
> >>>> [8] " 99997" " 99998" " 99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003"
> >>>> [15] "100004" "100005" "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>>
> >>>> Notice the extra leading space from 99995 to 99999? To make sure it only
> happened there:
> >>>>
> >>>> df2$id2[which(df1$id2 != df2$id2)]
> >>>> [1] " 99995" " 99996" " 99997" " 99998" " 99999"
> >>>>
> >>>> And just to make sure it only occurs in a 'apply' call, here is the same
> >>>> directly on a
> numeric vector:
> >>>>
> >>>> id2 <- format(1:110000, scientific = FALSE)
> >>>> id2[99990:100010]
> >>>> [1] " 99990" " 99991" " 99992" " 99993" " 99994" " 99995" " 99996"
> >>>> [8] " 99997" " 99998" " 99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003"
> >>>> [15] "100004" "100005" "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>>
> >>>> Here the leading spaces are for every number, which makes sense to me.
> >>>> Is there
> anything I'm misinterpreting in the behaviour of 'format'?
> >>>> Thanks in advance for any hint,
> >>>> Mathieu.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> PS: Some background for this question. It all comes from a Rmd document,
> >>>> that
> knitr consistently failed to process, while the R code was fine using batch
> or interactive
> R. knitr uses 'options(digits = 4)' as opposed to 'options(digits = 7)' by
> default in R, which
> made one of my function throw an error with knitr, but not with batch or
> interactive R. I
> managed to solve the problem using 'trim = TRUE' in 'format', but I still do
> not
> understand what's going on...
> >>>> If you're interested, see here for more details on the original problem:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17866230/knitr-vs-interactive-r-
> behaviour/17872176
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> ~$ whoami
> >>>> Mathieu Basille, PhD
> >>>>
> >>>> ~$ locate --details
> >>>> University of Florida \\
> >>>> Fort Lauderdale Research and Education Center
> >>>> (+1) 954-577-6314
> >>>> http://ase-research.org/basille
> >>>>
> >>>> ~$ fortune
> >>>> « Le tout est de tout dire, et je manque de mots
> >>>> Et je manque de temps, et je manque d'audace. »
> >>>> -- Paul Éluard
> >>>>
> >>>> ______________________________________________
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> David Winsemius
> >>> Alameda, CA, USA
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Mathieu Basille wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear list,
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is a simple example in which the behaviour of 'format' does not
> >>>> make sense to
> me. I have read the documentation and searched the archives, but nothing
> pointed me in
> the right direction to understand this behaviour. Let's start with a simple
> data frame:
> >>>>
> >>>> df1 <- data.frame(x = rnorm(110000), y = rnorm(110000), id = 1:110000)
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's now create a new variable 'id2' which is the character
> >>>> representation of 'id'.
> Note that I use 'scientific = FALSE' to ensure that long numbers such as
> 100,000 are not
> formatted using their scientific representation (in this case 1e+05):
> >>>>
> >>>> df1$id2 <- apply(df1, 1, function(dfi) format(dfi["id"], scientific =
> >>>> FALSE))
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's have a look at part of the result:
> >>>>
> >>>> df1$id2[99990:100010]
> >>>> [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >>>> [8] "99997" "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003"
> >>>> [15] "100004" "100005" "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>
> >>> Some formating processes are carried out by system functions. In this
> >>> case I am
> unable to reproduce with the same code on a Mac OS 10.7.5/R 3.0.1 Patched
> >>>
> >>>> df1$id2[99990:100010]
> >>> [1] "99990" "99991" "99992" "99993" "99994" "99995" "99996"
> >>> "99997"
> >>> [9] "99998" "99999" "100000" "100001" "100002" "100003" "100004"
> >>> "100005"
> >>> [17] "100006" "100007" "100008" "100009" "100010"
> >>>
> >>> (I did notice that generation of the id2 variable seemed to take an
> >>> inordinately long
> time.)
> >>>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> 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.
> >>
> >
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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.
______________________________________________
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.
