efficient test for missing values (NAs)
A small test indicates that the following may be the fastest method (although all are pretty fast) has.na <- !all(complete.cases(x)) Thanks Jim and Phil for your suggestions. /Ali
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 19:03, Jim Holtman <jholtman at gmail.com> wrote:
?complete.cases Sent from my iPhone On Oct 20, 2010, at 18:53, Ali Tofigh <alix.tofigh at gmail.com> wrote:
What is the best way to detect whether or not a (potentially large)
matrix contains missing values (NAs) or not? I use
if (sum(is.na(x)) > 0) {...}
are there more efficient ways?
/Ali
______________________________________________ R-help at r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.