Hi Ed,
> ...However, are you seeing a use for it that adds anything to simply using
> i2C from PDL::Complex?
No.
Best regards,
Luis
--
o
W. Luis Mochán, | tel:(52)(777)329-1734 /<(*)
Instituto de Cienci
ge.net<mailto:pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>;
perldl<mailto:pdl-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Pdl-devel] PDL 2.027 released
Hello,
I'm intrigued by ci. What is the reason for its behavior?
I found that ci was defined through pp_def with one output argument.
Thus, ci+$x i
Hello,
I'm intrigued by ci. What is the reason for its behavior?
I found that ci was defined through pp_def with one output argument.
Thus, ci+$x is interpreted as ci(+$x) which actually assigns
complex i to each element of $x if $x is a complex pdl. If $x is real,
then it assigns 0 (I guess it ty
to:moc...@icf.unam.mx>
Sent: 07 March 2021 15:10
To: pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>;
perldl<mailto:pdl-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Pdl-devel] PDL 2.027 released
Hi Ed,
> The problem you identified is due to a logic error
Hi Ed,
> The problem you identified is due to a logic error in the bifuncs in P::Ops –
> they weren’t handling complex inputs correctly because the code to do so was
> behind a check for unsigned-handling. Now that’s corrected, and there’s a
> test to guard against regressions. As soon as the
-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>;
perldl<mailto:pdl-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Pdl-devel] PDL 2.027 released
Well, so far, I have found that ** invokes the function PDL::power
which seems not to work with the new complex types. I don't kno
Well, so far, I have found that ** invokes the function PDL::power
which seems not to work with the new complex types. I don't know the
reason for having both a 'pow' and a 'power' function.
On the other hand, would it be feasible to enable data flow back to
the real and imaginary parts of a new
And pow also works. So it seems the problem is related to the
translation from the binary operator version '**'.
pdl> p +(1+ci)->ipow(2)
0+2i
pdl> p +(1+ci)->pow(2)
1.2246467991473532e-16+2i
pdl> p +(1+ci)**2
1+0i
pdl>
On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 05:03:49PM -0600, Luis Mochan wrote:
> > So powers of
> So powers of complex numbers are not working. I haven't looked yet at
> the P::Ops code. I'll try later.
ipow does work though.
--
o
W. Luis Mochán, | tel:(52)(777)329-1734 /<(*)
Instituto de Ciencias F
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 07:41:18PM +, Ed . wrote:
> Dear PDL folks,
> I have just uploaded PDL 2.027. Changes from 2.026:
Great!
I want to start using the new complex code, mostly to avoid the errors
due to bad uses of the extra (real-imag) dimension.
> - native support for complex num
10 matches
Mail list logo
