Hans, yes this can be frustrating. But Julia is in flux and I have to say that I am very happy that changes are reverted if they turn out to be not practically (e.g. ".+" which I also was not happy with).
One important thing to note: If you don't like this back and forth it should be better to just use a stable release. I am using 0.3 since summer for my research because it is important for me that thing just work. Master certainly contains several goodies I am eager to try but for serious coding it is a no go when one has to always adapt to recent changes on a development branch. Once 0.4 is released I will port thing in a single pass. Cheers Tobi Am Samstag, 27. Dezember 2014 00:00:08 UTC+1 schrieb Hans W Borchers: > > Don't worry. I am a long-term ... user and as such got used to really > harsh criticism. As others have noted, this is - besides Ruby - the most > friendly mailing list I have seen (and I am sometimes not living up to that > standard). What irritates me a bit are these back-and-forth decisions. I > accepted ".+" for scalar plus vector operations (with a bit of teeth > grinding, but listening to a good mathematical analogy), used it in some > programs, only learning a few weeks later that a change agent had struck > again. > > I know about (some of) the problems with rounding. The perhaps > mathematically most complete and correct arithmetic computing system, > PARI/GP, still uses "round-to-+Inf" and 'generations' of mathematicians > have lived well with that. And the "problems with the digit argument" > mentioned are perhaps a reason why many systems like Octave, Matlab (up to > 2014a), Mathematica, PARI/GP do not allow for a second parameter in their > 'round' functions. Maybe there is really no satisfying solution here for > this problem. > >
