At 12:33 PM 8/29/00 -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote:
>You should have a look at the PDL RFC 117 before submitting this.
>
>It would be bad to have multiple RFCs suggesting the same thing.
I just read PDL RFC 117, and your current argument with Dan aside...
I don't see a problem.
Here is the core of what I see in my RFC:
1. Use ';' as an index separator for matrices.
2. Use lists as methods of getting slices of matrices
3. Use ^var (or some other syntax) as a way of expressing
relationships/constraints among different indices when writing
matrix slices.
Here is what I see as the core of RFC 117:
1. Use start:stop:step as syntax for complex ranges.
I see them as orthogonal. You could just as easily use RFC 117 syntax to
specify the lists I use to get slices as you could standard perl lists.
>Much better to come to some agreement HERE on what the syntax
>should be first, then submit consensus RFCs.
>
>My view: I am pretty flexible I like most suggestions as long as
>they are concise.
>
>Don't forget we also need to support the equivalent of
>
>$pdl->slice('10:20:2')
@matrix[10:20:2];
that is, assuming my RFC and RFC117 are both accepted. What's the problem?
>i.e. use a non-unit stride
>
>Karl
