Hi Ed I believe the original logic here (likely mine) was that if the 0D PDLs turned automatically in to scalars they could be fed directly, without casting, in to perl-to-C calls and PDL did a lot of that. e.g. I used to do a lot of direct calling of the PGPLOT module commands.
I guess if that sort of thing has now been extirpated from the PDL source (which seems likely given all tests pass) itself all is good. Probably not many end user scripts need fixing. I think you are right it is better these days if objects do not magically change type. Happy for the name change :) It was not my joke... Karl > On 14 Jan 2024, at 12:46 am, Ed . <ej...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Karl, > > Good to hear from you! And I hope that apart from the issues you’ve raised, > that your experience with the new PDL is good. Have a look at the updated > demo system, including the updated 3D demos, and see if you can tell the > pthreading is done automatically on large-enough data by detecting the number > of cores available by default. > > The change in the aggregate functions was introduced in 2.056. I would now > say I didn’t take sufficient account of backwards compatibility on that one. > Sorry for the inconvenience. My reasoning was in how shocked I was that those > functions were returning Perl scalars. > > By the way, you (of all people!) are welcome to call these data objects what > you like, but another change made (this time in 2.040) was to rename > “piddles” (which always struck me as faintly juvenile, and I felt would > undermine PDL’s credibility for no good reason) to “ndarrays”, which is a > widely-used term. The “piddle” function was retained for back-compatibility. > > Best regards, > Ed > > From: Karl Glazebrook via pdl-general > <mailto:pdl-general@lists.sourceforge.net> > Sent: 07 January 2024 00:29 > To: perldl <mailto:pdl-general@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: [Pdl-general] Changes I noted PDL2.025 -> PDL2.084 - scalars vs > piddles > > Hi all, > > This dinosaur just upgraded from PDL v2.025 to v.2.084 (yes, I know that is > lame) > > I noticed a few things when running one of my complicated codes, I will start > seperate email threads > > Next I think this one is a design choice change I missed. > > - Functions like median() max() etc now return a 0D piddle and no longer a > scalar. This broke some gnarly code I had. > > I expect this change was sensible, I am just curious as the reasons and when > it happened? > > > best > > Karl > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pdl-general mailing list > pdl-general@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:pdl-general@lists.sourceforge.net> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general > <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general>
_______________________________________________ pdl-general mailing list pdl-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general
