[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about (if perl6 allows passing arrays implicitly by reference
without arglist flattening)
transpose @arr, $a, $b; # xchg
transpose @arr, {$a = $b}; # mv
transpose @arr, [0,3,4,1,2]; # PDL reorder
You know, I had just logged in to post
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
...Do you say you are confused by using vectors (=scalars) instead of
arrays?
I'm not having a problem with that personally but *many* users of PDL
have complained about being confused by this.
They assume ndim == array == perl array.
Jeremy Howard wrote:
So where is mv(), you ask? If you use the 'reorder' syntax, but don't
specify all of the dimensions in the list ref, then the remaining dimensions
are added in order:
That sounds good. I'd say why not also allow the mv syntax? It is
syntactically different from the
Karl Glazebrook wrote:
the arguments to reshape should be sizes not last elements (i.e. N's
not N-1's).
Yup, it's simple: size (N) vs index range (0..N-1)
How does this sound?
Logical and consistent ;)
Christian
Buddha Buck wrote:
When I heard about transpose() (as well as reshape(), etc), I was
concerned about the time it would take to execute these complex
operations. To wit, naively, I believed that a lot of data shuffling
would be necessary.
If I understand your message correctly this is
