Re: senseless warning in octave-3.6.2

[Sergei Steshenko]

>________________________________
> From: Michael Goffioul <address@hidden>
>To: Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden> 
>Cc: c. <address@hidden>; Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden>; Octave 
>users list <address@hidden> 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2012 6:44 PM
>Subject: Re: senseless warning in octave-3.6.2
> 
>
>On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>> From: c. <address@hidden>
>>> To: Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>
>>> Cc: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden>; Octave users list 
>>> <address@hidden>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2012 12:26 AM
>>> Subject: Re: senseless warning in octave-3.6.2
>>>
>>>
>>> Il giorno 02/lug/2012, alle ore 01.53, Sergei Steshenko ha scritto:
>>>
>>>>  As wrote much much earlier, essentially column vector vs row vector is a
>>> nuisance - one type of vector would suffice.
>>> In a sense, Octave, as Matlab, does not have either row or column vectors, 
>>> nor
>>> it has scalars, it just uses 2-index matrices for all those types.
>>> You might consider this a very exotic and probably annoying (and maybe even
>>> stupid) design choice, and I might even, partly, agree.
>>> But it is at the very root of the design of the Matlab language, so it 
>>> cannot be
>>> abandoned.
>>> The best option, if you cannot live with the way data-types are used in
>>> Octave/Matlab, is to switch to a different language.
>>>
>>> c.
>>
>><<<You might consider this a very exotic and probably annoying (and maybe 
>>even stupid) design choice, and I might even, partly, agree. But it is at the 
>>very root of the design of the Matlab language, so it cannot be abandoned>>>
>>
>>Huh ?!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>Here is a simple Octave session:
>>
>>"
>>octave:1> N=100
>>N =  100
>>octave:2> row_sin = sin(2 * pi * (0:N-1)/10);
>>octave:3> size(row_sin)
>>ans =
>>
>>     1   100
>>
>>octave:4> col_sin = row_sin';
>>octave:5> size(col_sin)
>>ans =
>>
>>   100     1
>>
>>octave:6> plot((0:N-1)', row_sin, 0:N-1, col_sin);
>>octave:7>            
>>".
>>
>>As everybody can see, the behavior does _not_ _at_ _all_ depend on the fact 
>>whether an entity is a row or a column vector.
>>
>>So, vector differentiation depending on row/column property can _definitely_ 
>>be abandoned - as the above example shows.
>>
>>Instead Octave developers in their "infinite wisdom" introduce outlandish
>>
>>row_vec OP col_vec -> matrix
>>
>>behavior and even make it default. Instead of, say, fixing (by first properly 
>>defining functionality) 'pkg.m'. Strangely enough, in VLSI design my 
>>mentoring managers taught me that first bugs are fixed, and then new features 
>>are introduced.
>>
>>In this case a whole layer of new bugs has been introduced.
>>
>
>
>What part in the sentence "you can get back the old behavior by turning the 
>broadcast warning into an error" was too difficult to understand? I think we 
>all understood that you're not pleased by the introduction of the new 
>broadcasting feature. So why not just disable it in your .octaverc?
>
>
>Michael.
>


What part of "default Octave behavior is mathematically senseless (in its 
row_vec OP col_vec -> matrix part) and why on earth it was made default ?!" is 
that difficult to understand ?

Octave developers decided to produce a tool for scientific calculations which 
by default in its row_vec OP col_vec -> matrix part makes no scientific sense ?


Regards,
  Sergei.





>