Re: Table model control strings

Marq Kole wrote:

>Hi Paul,
>
>With respect the control string there is a difference between "3CC" and "3CC,3CC" in that the first string only applies to the first dimension, while the second applies to both dimensions. If you only want to change the second dimension you'd have to use ",3CC". The dimensions that are not given a value take on the default control, i.e. "1LL". If you'd change the behavior to "default to the last dimension" it would require explicit changes for dimensions that up-to-now would get the default "1LL" control. I would definitely not be in favor of that.
>
>
>
On reading again, this does seem to be what the LRM is saying (default
to 1LL, missing controls permitted). I hadn't read the interp_control
EBNF carefully enough.

For the description of the null string for control:

"Null string, default linear interpolation and extrapolation. Dimensionality
of the data is assumed to be N+M-1. Column N+M is taken as the
dependent."

Isn't the dimensionality determined by the number of table inputs? Thus
M must be 1, and no need to assume anything? However, for file data
sources, if the first N columns are independent variables, then if
there are more than N+1 columns, the choice of the column is arbitrary
(N+1th or last column would seem the most reasonable).

>Perhaps for the "gratuitious orthogonality" for array-based table models we could also support null arguments, i.e.
>x = $table_model(in1, in2, d1, , d3, , 12, "3CC,I,3CC;2");
>This would be fine as long as all non-null arguments for the table model are arrays and the number of arguments matches the control string.
>
>Nevertheless, I would be fine with disallowing "I" and ";2" for array-based table models.
>
>

Me too.

Regards
Paul

-- 
Dr Paul Floyd
Mentor Graphics Corporation
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.