Glen, that's a great list of bugs. Have you considered filing them as issue(s)?
Some immediate thoughts: On Wednesday, December 02, 2015 06:17:06 AM Glen O wrote: > As an example, reshape(1,1) throws an error I'm not sure that's a real problem, although indeed implementing reshape on numbers would be more efficient than reshape([1], (1,1,1)) because in the latter you're creating two arrays. So possibly this is something we should implement. > , and squeeze(1,(1,)) gets stuck > in an infinite loop. That's definitely a bug. It's surely a very slow stack overflow (infinite recursion). > vec(1) Similar to reshape...maybe/maybe not. > throws an error, as does cumsum(1). Since sum(1) works, this should too. Bug. > And of > course there's the issue with getindex involving colon, arrays or ranges > for indexing (you'd think that, just as a[[1,1]] gives the value of a[1] > twice for an array, that it would do the same for a scalar, but it doesn't). Bug > I can understand the desire not to have them be identical (since there are > cases where a function should do a different thing for a number than it > does for an array), yet allow partial compatibility... it's just a little > arbitrary which cases work and which don't. Reports would help---not everyone hits these (I'm not sure I ever have).
