From thomas@biostat.washington.edu  Mon Aug  7 20:58:18 2000
From: thomas@biostat.washington.edu (thomas@biostat.washington.edu)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:58:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: [Rd] predict.lm is broken in 1.1.0-patched (2000-August-7) (PR#627)
Message-ID: <200008071958.VAA03515@pubhealth.ku.dk>

On 7 Aug 2000, Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote:

> ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk writes:
> 
> > predict.lm has been broken by recent changes to the patched branch.
> > 
> > It fails for all singular fits.  An example:
<snip>
> Sometimes the fix for one bug uncovers another. We have
> 
> > coef.aov
> function (object, ...) 
> {
>     z <- object$coef
>     z[!is.na(z)]
> }
> > coef.lm 
> function (object, ...) 
> object$coefficients

Ok, this explains it.  I *did* test it with a singular fit, but only with
lm(), not with aov().

coef.lm seems a more sensible convention, since it's a lot easy to remove
the NAs than to add them.


	-thomas



-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


[Rd] predict.lm is broken in 1.1.0-patched (2000-August-7) (PR#627)
thomas@biostat.washington.edu