Thanks, Ivar. I appreciate the help.
On Friday, March 7, 2014 1:36:14 AM UTC-5, Ivar Nesje wrote: > > Julia has made a very strange attempt to make floating point ranges work > more like real ranges. The implementation is somewhat complicated, but the > result seems to be very nice. > > The old behaviour was much more confusing: > > julia> v=.1:.1:.30.1:0.1:0.2 > > > If you want the details you can see > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/2333 and > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/5636 > > kl. 05:33:28 UTC+1 fredag 7. mars 2014 skrev Stephen Voinea følgende: >> >> Got it. Thanks for the fast, clear reply. >> >> On Thursday, March 6, 2014 11:12:39 PM UTC-5, Jameson wrote: >>> >>> `r.step` is not defined to be anything meaningful to the user. It is a >>> data field and all data fields are considered to be private details in >>> Julia. You can access them if you want, but they typically aren't part of >>> the API and may change at the whim of the implementer. You are probably >>> looking for `step(r)` which does return 0.3 in both cases. >>> >>> The range from 0.6 to 1.4 in steps of 0.3 ends at 1.2, so that's what >>> you get when you query for the last value `last(r)` >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Stephen Voinea <scvo...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> I noticed the following strangeness: >>>> >>>> julia> r = 0.6:0.3:1.2 >>>> 0.6:0.3:1.2 >>>> >>>> julia> r.step >>>> 3.0 >>>> >>>> julia> r.start >>>> 6.0 >>>> >>>> julia> r = 0.6:0.3:1.4 >>>> 0.6:0.3:1.2 >>>> >>>> julia> r.start >>>> 0.6 >>>> >>>> julia> r.step >>>> 0.3 >>>> >>>> Am I missing something? >>>> >>>> julia> versioninfo() >>>> Julia Version 0.3.0-prerelease+1829 >>>> Commit 037a469* (2014-03-04 12:46 UTC) >>>> Platform Info: >>>> System: Darwin (x86_64-apple-darwin13.1.0) >>>> CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3720QM CPU @ 2.60GHz >>>> WORD_SIZE: 64 >>>> BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH NO_AFFINITY) >>>> LAPACK: libopenblas >>>> LIBM: libopenlibm >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>> >>>
