Re: octave 3.1.55 different from 3.0

[Jaroslav Hajek]

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Bertrand Roessli
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> if I execute this function in both Octave 3.0 and 3.1.55 I get
> a different answer and I think that 3.0 is right?
>
>
> function test
>
> M_cell=cell(4,1);
> M_cell{1}=0;
> for l=1:3
>        M.mat(1:3)=[l l l];
>        M_cell{l+1}=M;
> endfor
>
> disp(M_cell);
> endfunction
>
> in Octave 3.0
>
> {
>  [1,1] = 0
>  [2,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       1   1   1
>
>  }
>
>  [3,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       2   2   2
>
>  }
>
>  [4,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       3   3   3
>
>  }
>
> }
>
> and the development version
> {
>  [1,1] = 0
>  [2,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       2   2   2
>
>  }
>
>  [3,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       2   2   2
>
>  }
>
>  [4,1] =
>  {
>    mat =
>
>       3   3   3
>
>  }
>
> }
>
> Bertrand Roessli
>
>

It seems to work in current tip.



-- 
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert & GNU Octave developer
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz