Perfect, thanks. I didn't know about vec(). Of course, it seems a lot like a degraded version of collect() without the ability to handle scalars!
R. On Friday, 27 May 2016 07:23:15 UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: > > >If so, is there any way of generating a Vector from either a Vector or a > scalar > > vec(collect(x)) seems to work in both cases. /Paul S > > > On Thursday, 26 May 2016 22:16:30 UTC+2, [email protected] wrote: >> >> I've also discovered that collect(1) will now generate a 0-dimensional >> Array, presumably as part of the same update, while collect([1]) still >> generates a Vector. Is this intended too? If so, is there any way of >> generating a Vector from either a Vector or a scalar - I was using collect >> to do this up to now with 0.[34].x, 0.5-dev...? >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Richard. >> >> PS If it's a permanent change, the docs should be updated too: >> >> Return an array of type Array{element_type,1} of all items in a >> collection. >> >> >> On Wednesday, 25 May 2016 20:41:05 UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am not sure if this is the right place to post questions about version >>> 0.5.0-, but I'll give it a try anyhow. >>> >>> In 0.4.5, collect([1 2]) gives Array{Int64,1}, like a column vector. >>> >>> In 0.5.0_ (as of 25 May, Win64), collect([1 2]) gives Array{Int64,2}, >>> like a row vector. >>> >>> Is this intended? (...just struggling to prepare for the next release) >>> >>> /Paul S >>> >>
