[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Correct behavior of common_size()?
From: |
Robert T. Short |
Subject: |
Correct behavior of common_size()? |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:59:22 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 |
When I include an empty vector in common_size() I get, for example,
octave> [ec,x,y,z]=common_size([],1,[1 2 3])
ec = 1
x = [](0x0)
y = 1
z =
1 2 3
In other words, I get an error because the empty matrix can't be sized
to match the other elements. I wonder if this is the correct behavior,
though. It is not clear to me what *should* happen and there is
probably a good reason for the current approach, but in addition to the
current behavior one of two possibilities comes to mind:
ec = 0
x = [](0x3)
y = [1 1 1]
z = [1 2 3]
or
ec = 0
x [] (0x0)
y = [1 1 1]
z = [1 2 3]
Thoughts? Or maybe this is just a case of educating Bob? BTW, if a
change needs to be made I am volunteering but I need to be clear on the
concept first.
Bob
- Correct behavior of common_size()?,
Robert T. Short <=