Rolf Turner writes:
> On 01/12/17 20:33, Hasan Diwan wrote:
>
>> Yes.
>
> Very true. But some *thinking* is required; that often proves to be a
> formidable stumbling block.
Or one of the best decision you'll ever take. You cannot master SAS without
expensive
courses and information does not
On 01/12/17 20:33, Hasan Diwan wrote:
Yes.
Very true. But some *thinking* is required; that often proves to be a
formidable stumbling block.
cheers,
Rolf Turner
On 30 November 2017 at 22:28, wrote:
I am a mature learner; 3 masters
some doctoral work “ statistics for social sciences
@all: Does it seem reasonable to add a discussion of '=' vs. '<-' to
the FAQ? It seems a regular question and something of a "hot" topic
to debate.
@KM Here are links I've accumulated to prior discussions on this
topic. I am pretty certain they are all unique.
http://blog.revolutionanalytics
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 6:04 PM, km wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> can we use '=' instead of '<-' operator for assignment in R programs?
Yes, mostly, you can also use 'help' to ask such questions:
> help("=")
The operators ‘<-’ and ‘=’ assign into the environment in which
they are evaluated. T
Yes, but <- is preferred. Note, there are also some differences. You can do the
following:
> a <- 10
> b = 10
> identical(a,b)
[1] TRUE
And you can also do
> myFun <- function(x, y = 100){
+ result <- x*y
+ result}
> myFun(x = 20)
[1] 2000
But, you cannot use '<-' to define the arguments of a
Hi,
Just as an example, here are three threads that discuss it.
http://www.mail-archive.com/r-help@r-project.org/msg16881.html
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/advice-opinion-on-vs-in-teaching-R-td1014502.html#a1014502
http://www.mail-archive.com/r-help@r-project.org/msg100034.html
Cheers,
Josh
Check the mail archieve on this; there has been a long discussion.
To avoid trouble in the future, use "<-" as the assignment operator.
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Alaios wrote:
> Hello
> I notice that in Linux the "=" operator works like the "<-" operator
> So a=3 is similar to a<-3.
> Co
On 16-Apr-08 11:13:40, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> Ted Harding wrote:
>>
>> One is that "NA" is not a value. Its logical status is,
>> in effect, "value not known". Therefore, when 'y' is "NA",
>> "x==y" cannot have a definite resolution, since it is
>> possible for the unkown value of 'y' to b
Ted Harding wrote:
>
> One is that "NA" is not a value. Its logical status is,
> in effect, "value not known". Therefore, when 'y' is "NA",
> "x==y" cannot have a definite resolution, since it is
> possible for the unkown value of 'y' to be equal to the
> value of 'x'; and equally possible that
Linn wrote:
> Hi
> Could anyone please explain to me the difference between the = and the ==?
> I'm quite new to R and I've tried to find out but didn't get any wiser...
"=" is the assignment operator as in
> x = 3
> x
[1] 3
(but use the "<-" operator instead, see a post by Bill Venables a few
On 15-Apr-08 12:28:53, Linn wrote:
>
> Hi
> Could anyone please explain to me the difference between
> the = and the ==?
> I'm quite new to R and I've tried to find out but didn't
> get any wiser...
>
> Thanks
While these are indeed documented in ?"=" and ?"==", as
Gabor Csardi has pointed out,
Hi.
= means assignment (like a=2, may be used instead of a <- 2, although
I prefer to always use <-); It is also used to pass values to
arguments in named argument lists, or to set default argument values).
== is the boolean (logical) operator for testing whether two values are equal
e.g. a <-
I'm sure you'll get a friendlier answer, but... see
?"="
?"=="
Introduction to R
G.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 05:28:53AM -0700, Linn wrote:
>
> Hi
> Could anyone please explain to me the difference between the = and the ==?
> I'm quite new to R and I've tried to find out but didn't get any wiser
13 matches
Mail list logo
