I assume that when I wake up at 5 AM to finish some DSP code. Really, it was just a stupid mistake. From a non-programmer's perspective (me), it seemed like it should have work. If you think that would be dangerous, I'll take your word for it.
On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 8:26:10 AM UTC-6, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Why would one assume that the default step size is -1 when the start is > bigger than the stop? The documentation for ranges clearly says that the > default step size is 1 unconditionally, not that it is sign(stop-start). > That would, by the way, be a very dangerous behavior. Perhaps a sidebar on > the colon syntax is warranted in the manual control flow section on for > loops, including examples of empty ranges and ranges that count downwards. > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Jay Kickliter <jay.ki...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I just realized that it works if I rewrite the range as 10:-1:1. It seems >> to me that either big:small should work with a default step size of -1, or >> the documentation needs a note. >> >> >> On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 7:32:10 AM UTC-6, Jay Kickliter wrote: >>> >>> Are they meant to work? I could only find one meaning of them not >>> working (issue 5778 <https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/5778>). >>> >>> Here's an example: >>> >>> julia> for i = 1:10 >>> >>> println(i) >>> >>> end >>> >>> 1 >>> >>> 2 >>> >>> 3 >>> >>> 4 >>> >>> 5 >>> >>> 6 >>> >>> 7 >>> >>> 8 >>> >>> 9 >>> >>> 10 >>> >>> >>> julia> for i = 10:1 >>> >>> println(i) >>> >>> end >>> >>> >>> julia> >>> >> >
