Well, now I'm confused myself.  I don't have time to
think clearly on this but if there is a better use case
for using the old orientation, a Feature Request could
be made.  In the meantime, at least the docs are
correct and a transpose of axes can fix a "wrong"
dimension order problem.

--Chris

On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Craig DeForest
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Chris: you are right.  I am being stupid.
>
> Yes, selecting ((0)) yields the first row of the file, which is exactly what 
> Louis was complaining about. So the documentation is correct.
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Chris Marshall wrote:
>
>> Hi Craig-
>>
>> The confusion is between columns in the piddle
>> and columns in the data file.  dim(0) of the piddle
>> corresponds to a going down the column in the
>> data file:
>>
>>> pdl> #cat test3x4
>>> 0 3 6 9
>>> 1 4 7 10
>>> 2 5 8 11
>>>
>>> pdl> $a = rcols 'test3x4', []
>>> Reading data into piddles of type: [ Double ]
>>> Read in 12 elements.
>>>
>>> pdl> p $a
>>>
>>> [
>>> [ 0  1  2]
>>> [ 3  4  5]
>>> [ 6  7  8]
>>> [ 9 10 11]
>>> ]
>>>
>>> pdl> p sequence(3,4)
>>>
>>> [
>>> [ 0  1  2]
>>> [ 3  4  5]
>>> [ 6  7  8]
>>> [ 9 10 11]
>>> ]
>>>
>>> pdl> @aa = rcols 'test3x4'
>>> Reading data into piddles of type: [ Double Double Double Double ]
>>> Read in 3 elements.
>>>
>>> pdl> p @aa[0..3]
>>> [0 1 2] [3 4 5] [6 7 8] [9 10 11]
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Craig DeForest
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Chris, see my example that reproduces the old behavior with the latest git 
>>> - dim(0) running across column within a row and dim(1) running across row 
>>> within a column.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Chris Marshall wrote:
>>>
>>>> There was a brief period where the 2D array
>>>> support in rcols had different behavior for a
>>>> single column specification versus the new
>>>> 2D array ref specification.
>>>>
>>>> That has been corrected so that dim(0) is
>>>> *always* the data down the column and
>>>> thus, the 2D piddles have dim(1) running
>>>> *across* the columns selected.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know, the documentation is correct
>>>> as written for PDL-2.4.11.
>>>>
>>>> --Chris
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Louis Chaillet
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Hi, just a quick question.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that the order of the dimensions of a piddle that I read from 
>>>>> file
>>>>> with rcols seem to have changed from Perl release 5.10.1 to 5.14.2.
>>>>>
>>>>> It may have changed in between, but those are the versions I have. In the
>>>>> earlier version the first dimension was over the rows of the file. In the
>>>>> second it is over the columns of the file.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this correct, or am I missing something? If it is correct what was the
>>>>> first version with the first dimension over the columns of the file?
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards, Louis
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Perldl mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Perldl mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl

Reply via email to