Re: size of 3d array

[David Bateman]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> On  4-Dec-2006, David Bateman wrote:
>
> | Norbert Hauser wrote:
> | > 
> | > Is there an explanation, why matlab combines the dimensions 2+3 in
> | > s2, but octave doesn't? Has this been implemented intentionally,
> | > and can I make octave behave like matlab in this case without
> | > changing existing code?
>
> I think Matlab does this to be consistent (?) with the way it also
> allows indexing like this:
>
>   x = reshape (1:8, 2, 2, 2);
>   x(2,4)
>     ==> 8
>
> I remember recently changing Octave to allows this indexing to work,
> but I didn't know that the size function would also report a different
> size.
>
> | The attached patch will make octave compatible with the behavior of
> | matlab. I don't know if I like the behavior of matlab, but if we want
> | compatibility this patch will do it.
>
> Please check in the change to Octave.
>
> Thanks,
>
> jwe
>
>   
Ok done...

D.

-- 
David Bateman                                address@hidden
Motorola Labs - Paris                        +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph) 
Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin    +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob) 
91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE                  +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax) 

The information contained in this communication has been classified as: 

[x] General Business Information 
[ ] Motorola Internal Use Only 
[ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary