[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hamming etc. windows are wrong
From: |
Jerry |
Subject: |
Re: Hamming etc. windows are wrong |
Date: |
Fri, 26 Sep 2014 17:28:19 -0700 |
On Sep 26, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Mike Miller <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Jerry, replying only to and in the context of Octave...
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:41:55 -0700, Jerry wrote:
>> I’ve noticed that the Hamming window (and I suppose other windows)
>> provided by Octave, SciPy****, and NumPy***** is wrong
> [...]
>> So rather than host an argument on this list, this is what I propose:
>> Do what Matlab** does. Acknowledge both uses by making a flag to
>> handle the “periodic” or the “symmetric” cases. The Matlab default is
>> “symmetric” which is of course unfortunate but at least such inclusion
>> in Octave, NumPy, and SciPy would retain compatibility with the
>> existing usage. Then it’s up to the user whether to shoot him/herself
>> in the foot, assuming that such a decision is guided by actually
>> referring to the documentation for the package being used and not
>> blindly using the default.
>
> No argument here. Rest assured that is something that I have planned to
> do in Octave for hamming and the other window functions that take a
> symmetric/periodic option flag in Matlab.
>
> If there is not a bug report already open about this, feel free to file
> one. It's already on my own task list, so I expect it will get done
> eventually.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> mike
Thanks, Mike. I've made a ticket for this. I just pasted the text of my
original note--should be enough to jog your memory.
Jerry