Re: ellipse

[Søren Hauberg]

lor, 31 01 2009 kl. 10:26 -0500, skrev John W. Eaton:
> On 31-Jan-2009, Soren Hauberg wrote:
> 
> | That being said, it's not an important issue for me, so I don't mind
> | swapping things back. Alternatively, we could add something like
> | 
> |   if (isvector (n) && isscalar (shift))
> |     tmp = n;
> |     n = shift;
> |     shift = tmp;
> |   endif
> | 
> | to allow both styles.
> 
> I'd generally be against this kind of thing as it seems an unnecessary
> complication.

I agree

> Also, why should these two arguments be singled out for
> this kind of treatment when LEVEL is not?

Good point.

>   And, if we include LEVEL in
> the mix, then there is an ambiguity.  So I think we should choose an
> order and stick with it.

Ok. How about

  ellipse (a, shift, level, n, ...)

? I guess that orders the input arguments by how important they are.

> Also, I think you should write eigenvalue and eigenvector in the docs,
> not Eigen value and Eigen vector.

Fixed.

Soren