No particular case. Seth referred to the two options of creating a new matrix or creating the map in place in one of his comments on the original post, so I was just being accommodating. I guess the parallel would be matrix:set and matrix:set-and-report. But as noted, I have some unease with the map-in-place with multiple matrices and would be happy to drop it. I'm not an expert in the efficiency of Java's cleaning up discarded arrays so I don't know if keeping the old matrix would make things more efficient if the matrix is large.
On another point, and perhaps this is another topic entirely, how do I find out what exceptions are thrown by ReporterTask.report? The map primitive throws an appropriate error when the task refers to an argument not matched by a list, but I'm not getting that by catching runtime exceptions in my java code. I've checked the API, but don't see that information there. On Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:02:13 PM UTC-5, Jason Bertsche wrote: > > I've updated my update to the matrix extension by allowing the new map > reporter primitive to take multiple matrices just as the NetLogo map > primitive can take multiple lists. > > > Great! > > I've also added a map-in-place command primitive that replaces its single > matrix argument with the new matrix. > > > What's the use case you're trying to address with `map-in-place`? > > Jason Bertsche > Senior Software Developer - NetLogo > > On 02/19/2014 07:31 PM, Charles wrote: > > A question about design. I've updated my update to the matrix extension > by allowing the new map reporter primitive to take multiple matrices just > as the NetLogo map primitive can take multiple lists. I've also added a > map-in-place command primitive that replaces its single matrix argument > with the new matrix. It would be trivial to allow map-in-place to take > multiple matrices and to replace the first one in the list. But this makes > me uneasy. It seems to me to be courting confusion and errors, and doing > things in place seems out of keeping with most NetLogo primitives. > > Any thoughts? > > Charles > > On Monday, February 17, 2014 4:24:08 PM UTC-5, Charles wrote: >> >> Seth's comment in Stack Overflow about the usefulness of a map primitive >> in the matrix extension led me to add one, matrix:map task matrix. In the >> process, I did some updating to use jama-1.0.3 rather than 1.0.2 and made >> some minor non-substantive changes to the code to make my compiler happy. >> I forked the original code off of the github NetLogo site to my own github >> account, but now that I've made the changes, I'm not sure what to do next. >> As a bundled extension I can't put it out there myself, and I assume that >> even if the changes were useful for a large enough audience, there would be >> a good bit of checking that you all would want to do. Indeed, I'm not >> really clear on how I would push this back to you if it were useful. So, >> I'm looking for advice on next steps, although if that is to just use it >> myself, that's fine too. >> >> Charles >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "netlogo-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "netlogo-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
