Skip to content
Prev 243631 / 398506 Next

anova error

On Dec 1, 2010, at 9:18 AM, Peter Ehlers wrote:

            
Furthermore isn't it a bit <something> to be asking why the sign on a  
number that is effectively  zero happens to be negative? I would think  
that FAQ 7.31 applied even back in the 2.9 and 2.10 era.

(I still get a negative number in R 2.12.0 that is effectively zero,  
-4.4409e-16,  and rounded is exactly the same as the difference  
between sqrt(2)^2 and 2 in the FAQ entry, so if it were supposed to be  
"fixed" (which I'm not saying it should be) then it didn't occur until  
very recently.)