I'm sure you know this, but I think you are failing to acknowledge in this discussion is that everything is a tradeoff when dealing with memory representations of tensors. The reality is always going to be that the machine organizes everything internally one way, and languages paper over that to different degrees. Deleting _anything_ from the middle of a datastructure is always going to be a nontrivial operation unless that datastructure is designed for it - arrays are certainly not one of those datastructures. The issues are worse for anything 2D or higher, e.g. deleting a row of a column-wise-storage matrix.
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:35:47 AM UTC-5, Don Gateley wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:32:42 AM UTC-8, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Don Gateley <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Nonsense. >>> >> >> It would be much more helpful (not to mention polite) to make an actual >> counter argument. Given a convincing argument for a feature like this, it >> may very well get implemented and included in the language. Given >> "Nonsense", I for one am inclined to do nothing. >> > > In general I think it a real language plus if operation is uniform across > data geometries. APL stands as a model of this kind of design. Having to > special case code based on how an array is organized just seems wrong to > me. Or nonsensical. :-) >
