"David L. Nicol" wrote: > > Nathan Wiger wrote: > > > Well, this is not bad, only it's not without its problems. Say you > > wanted to get your indices implicitly: > > > > @a[getindices()]; > > @a[$r->get_x, $r->get_y]; > > @a["@{\(getindices())}"]; > @a[join $",$r->get_x, $r->get_y]; Constructs like this are the reason that we (PDLers) are unhappy with our current slicing syntax (slice, cf.RFC 115,117). IMHO continuing along these lines is *not* the way forward. Christian
- Re: Designing Perl 6 data crunching (wa... Karl Glazebrook
- Re: n-dim matrices Baris
- a syntax derived from constant-time hash-based ... David L. Nicol
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time has... Nathan Wiger
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... David L. Nicol
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... Nathan Wiger
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... David L. Nicol
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... Nathan Wiger
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... David L. Nicol
- Re: a syntax derived from constant-time... Karl Glazebrook
- Re: n-dim matrices c . soeller
- Re: n-dim matrices Karl Glazebrook
- Re: n-dim matrices Buddha Buck
- Re: n-dim matrices Karl Glazebrook
- Re: n-dim matrices Buddha Buck
- Re: n-dim matrices Christian Soeller
- Re: n-dim matrices Buddha Buck
- Re: n-dim matrices Christian Soeller
- Re: n-dim matrices Karl Glazebrook
- Re: n-dim matrices David L. Nicol
- Re: n-dim matrices Jeremy Howard