From Thierry.ONKELINX at inbo.be  Thu Aug  7 11:49:51 2008
From: Thierry.ONKELINX at inbo.be (ONKELINX, Thierry)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 11:49:51 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Bug in rnorm? (PR#12016)
In-Reply-To: <20080807093315.B1174282EFC2@mail.pubhealth.ku.dk>
References: <20080807093315.B1174282EFC2@mail.pubhealth.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <2E9C414912813E4EB981326983E0A1040536F6D6@inboexch.inbo.be>


That's not a bug. It's FAQ 7.31

Thierry


------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature
and Forest
Cel biometrie, methodologie en kwaliteitszorg / Section biometrics,
methodology and quality assurance
Gaverstraat 4
9500 Geraardsbergen
Belgium
tel. + 32 54/436 185
Thierry.Onkelinx at inbo.be
www.inbo.be

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

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org
[mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org] Namens
paul.eckermann at adelaide.edu.au
Verzonden: donderdag 7 augustus 2008 11:33
Aan: r-devel at stat.math.ethz.ch
CC: R-bugs at biostat.ku.dk
Onderwerp: [Rd] Bug in rnorm? (PR#12016)

Full_Name: Paul Eckermann
Version: 2.7.1
OS: Windows XP Service Pack 2
Submission from: (NULL) (129.127.183.12)


This is the first time I have submitted a bug report, so apologies if I
have not
followed the correct protocol.

If I enter

length(rnorm(100*.29))

it returns 28 rather than 29.

y<-(1:100)/100
z<-sapply(y,function(x) length(rnorm(x*100)))
z!=100*y

indicates that it has something to do with multiples of 7 (rounding
error?),
even though 29, 57 and 58 are the 3 values for which it returns
incorrect values
of z.

I hope that this is not something obvious that I have missed. This can
be
overcome by doing the x*100 calculation outside the rnorm function, but
I don't
see why this needs to be done when the answer is (supposed to be) an
integer.

Regards,
Paul Eckermann

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

Dit bericht en eventuele bijlagen geven enkel de visie van de schrijver weer en bindt het INBO onder geen enkel beding, zolang dit bericht niet bevestigd is door een geldig ondertekend document.
The views expressed in  this message and any annex are purely those of the writer and may not be regarded as stating an official position of INBO, as long as the message is not confirmed bij a duly signed document



[Rd] Bug in rnorm? (PR#12016)
ONKELINX, Thierry