A range should act (for the most part) exactly like an array. For example indexing into a range is identical (syntax-wise) to indexing an array. What I am concerned about is performance. For instance if I had a range that has a large amount of elements would indexing into it be slower then indexing into an array? Wouldn't the range have to compute the value every single time instead of just doing a memory lookup? Or is the calculation of elements trivial and the memory savings make up for it?
Performance questions aside, having linspace return a range instead of an array just feels like a change for changes sake. I don't see a good reason for displacing the behaviour of linspace for a behaviour that already realized in linrange. -Luke On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 6:13:37 PM UTC-7, Chris wrote: > > For me, I think I just expect a vector from experience, and I could > probably just change the way I work with a little effort. > > One exception (I think) is that I often do numerical integration over a > range of values, and I need the results at every value. I'm not sure if > there's a way to do that with range objects only. > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015, 20:59 Stefan Karpinski <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I'm curious why you need a vector rather than an object. Do you mutate it >> after creating it? Having linspace return an object instead of a vector was >> a bit of a unclear judgement call so getting feedback would be good. >> >> On Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Patrick Kofod Mogensen < >> [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> No: >>> >>> julia> logspace(0,3,5) >>> 5-element Array{Float64,1}: >>> 1.0 >>> 5.62341 >>> 31.6228 >>> 177.828 >>> 1000.0 >>> >>> On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 8:50:47 PM UTC-4, Luke Stagner wrote: >>>> >>>> Thats interesting. Does logspace also return a range? >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 5:43:28 PM UTC-7, Chris wrote: >>>>> >>>>> In 0.4 the linspace function returns a range object, and you need to >>>>> use collect() to expand it. I'm also interested in nicer syntax. >>>> >>>>
