At 12:33 PM 8/29/00 -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote: >You should have a look at the PDL RFC 117 before submitting this. > >It would be bad to have multiple RFCs suggesting the same thing. I just read PDL RFC 117, and your current argument with Dan aside... I don't see a problem. Here is the core of what I see in my RFC: 1. Use ';' as an index separator for matrices. 2. Use lists as methods of getting slices of matrices 3. Use ^var (or some other syntax) as a way of expressing relationships/constraints among different indices when writing matrix slices. Here is what I see as the core of RFC 117: 1. Use start:stop:step as syntax for complex ranges. I see them as orthogonal. You could just as easily use RFC 117 syntax to specify the lists I use to get slices as you could standard perl lists. >Much better to come to some agreement HERE on what the syntax >should be first, then submit consensus RFCs. > >My view: I am pretty flexible I like most suggestions as long as >they are concise. > >Don't forget we also need to support the equivalent of > >$pdl->slice('10:20:2') @matrix[10:20:2]; that is, assuming my RFC and RFC117 are both accepted. What's the problem? >i.e. use a non-unit stride > >KarlThread Previous