Hi,
What's the best way to typecheck that an array is of floats, but any
precision is OK? I've found it useful to do this because a number of
operations fail when given integer vector inputs (for example, 10.^[-3:3]).
I noticed that
x::Vector{FloatingPoint}
does not seem to cover them. I
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:53 PM, John Myles White johnmyleswh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Brendan,
It looks like you’re hitting Julia’s invariance for the first time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covariance_and_contravariance_(computer_science)
Oh nice. I could never keep the
hcat and vcat will do the trick. Thanks!
-Brendan
Hi, I'd like to create a matrix with an array comprehension. Specifically,
I have a function that returns a 2-length array, like
function f()
[3.0, 5.0]
end
And I'd like an Nx2 (or 2xN) matrix from its output. Unfortunately, an
obvious way of calling it results in:
[f() for i=1:3]
But that calls `f()` on every loop of your comprehension, so it's probably
best to do something like:
g = f()
In [13]: [g[i] for i=1:2, j=1:3]
Out [13]: 2x3 Array{Any,2}:
3.0 3.0 3.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
Ah ... I should have said, actually, I don't want a constant value. I
wanted f()
On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:05:06 PM UTC-5, John Myles White wrote:
(7) + (8) These rules are part of the official Google style guides for R,
which is the language with the most similarity to Julia that’s being used
at companies with public facing style guidelines. I think they’re quite
