| Re: N_ELEMENTS and WHERE: Scalar or Array ? [message #14180 is a reply to message #14130] |
Wed, 03 February 1999 00:00   |
wmc
Messages: 117
Registered: February 1995
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Stein Vidar Hagfors Haugan <steinhh@ulrik.uio.no> wrote:
> In article <36b5d66b.0@news.nwl.ac.uk> wmc@bas.ac.uk writes:
>> If this is necessary for legacy reasons, it might be possible to make
>> () and [] behave differently in this case? Possibly a missed
>> opportunity when [] came in!
> How'bout {} ? :-) I'm not *just* kidding. [] work as both array
> constructors and indexing brackets, so {} could work as both
> structure constructors and indexing brackets..
Hmm, having three different sorts of brackets to make arrays is
a bit of overkill. Anyway, {} might be needed for associative
arrays one day!
>>> array[NaN] = 5 ; Would be allowed, but does nothing
>>
>> This could well be possible as an easy-to-do work-around. In that
>> case, where would have to return NaN not -1.
> (Yes - though with a WHERE(..,/nan) switch)
Hmm, that would be acceptable. Or an nwhere function (a bit less typing).
>> Incidentally, I've just realised how dangerous the out-of-bounds stuff
>> is:
>>
>> array([where(array eq false)])='stoat'
>>
>> assigns to the first element...
> And you can *bet* some program(mer)s out there are counting on
> exactly this as a *feature*! Sorry to say so, but...that's why
> you'd have to introduce a keyword switch in WHERE.
Well, they are very silly people then. Does anyone on this newsgroup want
to confess to using this "feature"?
-W.
--
William M Connolley | wmc@bas.ac.uk | http://www.nbs.ac.uk/public/icd/wmc/
Climate Modeller, British Antarctic Survey | Disclaimer: I speak for myself
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
