FYI, transposing currently doesn't work even on built-in arrays because it
also calls transpose on each element as well. So it converts them all to
Array{T,2} and then can't fit them back into a Array{Array{T,1},1}.
On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 5:24:29 PM UTC-5, Jeff Bezanson wrote:
>
> Transposing [vec1, vec2, vec3] will absolutely work. I think the issue
> you saw with it was specific to ImmutableArrays. I don't know why they
> have that behavior.
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Simon Danisch <[email protected]
> <javascript:>> wrote:
> > I mean, my whole busyness is about constructing matrices of Vec2/3/4,
> which
> > inherit from DenseArray.
> > So I'm basically forced, if I'm not missing something, to do quite a bit
> of
> > work to get my [vec1 vec2 vec3] going.
> > Especially, as transpose([vec1, vec2, vec3]) doesn't seem to work, bug
> or
> > not isn't known to me.
> >
> > 2015-02-25 23:18 GMT+01:00 Simon Danisch <[email protected]
> <javascript:>>:
> >>
> >> Well, the issue raised here was, how do you realize non concatening [a
> b
> >> c]? This seems impossible now, even though that there are quite a few
> use
> >> cases for it...
> >>
> >> 2015-02-25 23:13 GMT+01:00 Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]
> <javascript:>>:
> >>>
> >>> I actually think the plan of [a,b,c] for construction without
> >>> concatenation and [a;b;c] and [a b c] for concatenation is pretty
> good. I no
> >>> longer feel that there's any need for a new bracket like [| |]. The
> thing
> >>> that clicked for me is that [a;] isn't really concatenation at all
> anyway.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Simon Danisch <[email protected]
> <javascript:>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As Julia was the first language to introduce me to this kind of
> >>>> constructs, I'm not sure about your used terms.
> >>>> Concatenate for me would firstly mean, to just connect elements
> (that's
> >>>> at least what the German translation suggests), which I would apply
> to the
> >>>> process of putting the elements together into one array. The elements
> in my
> >>>> case are the Vectors.
> >>>> You seem to use it as synonymous with concatenation + flattening
> >>>> (sticking to the function names I guess).
> >>>> I'd say [a,b] is supposed to concatenate, but shouldn't flatten,
> right?
> >>>> So yes, different syntax for concatenating, and
> concatenating+flattening
> >>>> would make this case much, much clearer.
> >>>> Then it's not this fuzzy magic thing, that sometimes happens and
> >>>> sometimes not and both clearly encapsulates a concept and use the
> same basic
> >>>> syntax.
> >>>> So:
> >>>> [vec, vec] => [vec, vec] # With optional typing, ensuring that you
> don't
> >>>> end up with Any[]
> >>>> [vec vec] => [vec vec] # With optional typing, ensuring that you
> don't
> >>>> end up with Any[]
> >>>>
> >>>> [| vec, vec |] => [el1, el2, el3, el4, ...]# With optional typing,
> >>>> ensuring that you don't end up with Any[]
> >>>> [| vec vec |] => [el el2 ; el3 el4]# With optional typing, ensuring
> >>>> that you don't end up with Any[]
> >>>>
> >>>> I do think, that this is very clear and consistent and doesn't leave
> >>>> anything in doubt!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am Mittwoch, 25. Februar 2015 19:00:01 UTC+1 schrieb Simon Danisch:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi there,
> >>>>> I thought default concatenation was deprecated, to make it easier to
> >>>>> create arrays of arrays... But it became rather impossible and
> confusing in
> >>>>> the horizontal case, from what I see.
> >>>>> Is there really not a single method left from the few ways in 0.35
> of
> >>>>> creating a horizontal vector of vectors?
> >>>>> 0.4:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://gist.github.com/SimonDanisch/6972c1c090c608738e83#file-cat0-4-jl
> >>>>> 0.3.5:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://gist.github.com/SimonDanisch/058ef76b2583c620b667#file-cat3-5-jl
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Am I missing something, or is this a bug?!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>> Simon
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
