Le mardi 17 novembre 2015 à 02:46 -0800, Peter Kovesi a écrit : > Thanks Eric. Yes I appreciate that the language is highly flexible > and one can do lots of things. I don't want to get hung up on using > indexing with integer valued floats in particular, my concern is more > philosophical I'm sympathetic to the idea of allowing indexing with reals, but so far I haven't found very compelling examples to support my position. Could you provide concrete use cases where this makes life easier, at least for newcomers? Julia's development is often driven by actual experiences of what is really useful and what isn't.
Regards > For much of what I do I am wanting to solve some technical problem > within an environment that involves a minimal overhead in solving the > coding problem. If, as I am developing my solution, I end up writing > some code that happens to use indexing with integer valued floats, or > would find a meshgid() function handy, then I do not want the > language to 'get in my way'. (Hands up everyone who has their own > implementation of meshgrid() !) Yes I know these things are not > required and are not efficient but I may find them handy and I don't > want to be distracted from solving my technical problem while I > attend to any finicky language issues. I want to develop my > initial solution with the minimal amount of code and the minimal > number of special data types. Later, when I have things solved, I > can return to the code and re-engineer it for efficiency > > It is extremely attractive that you can engineer your Julia code to > be highly efficient but I am hoping the language can develop in a > way that does not compromise simplicity and convenience. > > Cheers > Peter
