Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-12-07 Thread Robin Hankin
Hello everyone On 1 Sep 2007, at 01:39, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > The IEEE floating point standard allows for negative zero, but it's > hard > to know that you have one in R. One reliable test is to take the > reciprocal. For example, > >> y <- 0 >> 1/y > [1] Inf >> y <- -y >> 1/y > [1] -Inf

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-09-01 Thread Petr Savicky
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:22:26PM -0600, Tony Plate wrote: > One place where I've been caught by -ve zeros is with unit tests. If > identical(-0, 0) returns FALSE, and the object storage doesn't preserve > -ve zeros, that can lead to test failures that are tricky to debug. > > However, it does

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-09-01 Thread Tony Plate
One place where I've been caught by -ve zeros is with unit tests. If identical(-0, 0) returns FALSE, and the object storage doesn't preserve -ve zeros, that can lead to test failures that are tricky to debug. However, it doesn't look like that is too much a problem in the current incarnation o

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-09-01 Thread Petr Savicky
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:02PM -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote: [snip] > The other day I came across one in complex numbers, and it took me a > while to figure out that negative zero was what was happening: > > > x <- complex(real = -1) > > x > [1] -1+0i > > 1/x > [1] -1+0i > > x^(1/3) >

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-09-01 Thread Jeffrey Horner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On 8/31/07, Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The IEEE floating point standard allows for negative zero, but it's hard >> to know that you have one in R. One reliable test is to take the >> reciprocal. For example, >> >> > y <- 0 >> > 1/y >> [1] Inf >>

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-08-31 Thread deepayan . sarkar
On 8/31/07, Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The IEEE floating point standard allows for negative zero, but it's hard > to know that you have one in R. One reliable test is to take the > reciprocal. For example, > > > y <- 0 > > 1/y > [1] Inf > > y <- -y > > 1/y > [1] -Inf > >

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-08-31 Thread Steven McKinney
day27 svn rev42083 language R version.string R version 2.5.1 (2007-06-27) Steven McKinney -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Duncan Murdoch Sent:

Re: [Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-08-31 Thread Gabor Grothendieck
On 8/31/07, Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The IEEE floating point standard allows for negative zero, but it's hard > to know that you have one in R. One reliable test is to take the > reciprocal. For example, > > > y <- 0 > > 1/y > [1] Inf > > y <- -y > > 1/y > [1] -Inf > > The

[Rd] Friday question: negative zero

2007-08-31 Thread Duncan Murdoch
The IEEE floating point standard allows for negative zero, but it's hard to know that you have one in R. One reliable test is to take the reciprocal. For example, > y <- 0 > 1/y [1] Inf > y <- -y > 1/y [1] -Inf The other day I came across one in complex numbers, and it took me a while to