[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: matrix append
From: |
Andy Adler |
Subject: |
Re: matrix append |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Jun 2003 16:43:29 -0400 (EDT) |
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, John W. Eaton wrote:
> If you want to do
>
> [X; A]
>
> use the "stack" method instead:
>
> X.stack (A);
>
> BTW, the append and stack and append are const methods, so what you
> really want is probably
>
> X = X.stack (A);
>
> In any case, I suppose these names are not good. Maybe we should
> introduce vcat and hcat or similar instead and deprecate the stack and
> append names.
I wrote scripts for vcat and hcat for the sparse functions.
I think they're a little more intuitive, but I don't think
it makes a big difference.
What's really needed, of course, is some good documentation on
octave internals, and/or some good example code. Unfortunately,
everyone who could write that is far too busy ...
Another (off topic) question: If user defined types override
stack/append, how close would that get us to allowing the
interpreter to call them for "[A,B];"?
andy
-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------