From pdalgd at gmail.com  Tue May  6 07:35:01 2014
From: pdalgd at gmail.com (peter dalgaard)
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 07:35:01 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Historical NA question
In-Reply-To: <53681944.9020606@fhcrc.org>
References: <CABdHhvFt2n6=ORLBSTYxkA_G+t_d_H=0B1+vhhM_ZFL_Z-RT3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<5366EAC6.9030109@yorku.ca> <53681944.9020606@fhcrc.org>
Message-ID: <4BBA43DC-39CB-4CCC-9172-E2318459FD77@gmail.com>


On 06 May 2014, at 01:05 , Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fhcrc.org> wrote:

> 
> BTW, that %in% has precedence over arithmetic operations is surprising,
> error-prone, and doesn't cover any reasonable use case (who needs to
> multiply the logical vector returned by %in% by some value?) but that's
> another story:

The point here is that the %foo% operators all have the _same_ precedence. In principle, they can be user-coded, and there is no way to express what precedence is desirable. It may turn out slightly weird for %in%, but think of what would happen if %*% had lower precedence than addition. 

-- 
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com



[Rd] Historical NA question
peter dalgaard