Block Matrice transpose?

[RadovanOmorjan]

I hope this is not posted before. The Matcad have always the approach not to transpose matrices inside matrices. Is this correct?

Regards,
Radovan

[StuartBruff]

On 8/24/2009 5:01:12 AM, omorr wrote:
== I hope this is not posted before. The Matcad
have always the approach not to transpose matrices
inside matrices. Is this correct?

What do you think the problem is, Radovan?

Spirit has transposed the 'outer' vector but left
the contents of the 'inner' matrices alone, which
is what Mathcad has always done. Or am I missing
something here?

Interesting, though, and I don't think I'd noticed
this before, applying vectorzize to a transpose
doesn't apply the tranposition to nested elements.
However, if one defines a function 'transpose' and
applies vectorize to that, then the nested
elements are transposed. I wonder if the
vectorizing the transposition operator should
affect the nested elements?

Stuart

[RadovanOmorjan]

On 8/24/2009 6:36:35 AM, stuartafbruff wrote:
>On 8/24/2009 5:01:12 AM, omorr wrote:
>Spirit has transposed the 'outer' vector
>but left
>the contents of the 'inner' matrices
>alone, which
>is what Mathcad has always done. Or am
>I missing
>something here?
No, as far as I know Mathcad worked this way.
>
>Interesting, though, and I don't think
>I'd noticed
>this before, applying vectorzize to a
>transpose
>doesn't apply the tranposition to nested
>elements.
>However, if one defines a function
>'transpose' and
>applies vectorize to that, then the
>nested
>elements are transposed. I wonder if
>the
>vectorizing the transposition operator
>should
>affect the nested elements?
>
Thanks for the explanation Stuart. After a long time of using Mathcad, I am still slipping on these things.

Regards,
Radovan

[RadovanOmorjan]

On 8/24/2009 6:36:35 AM, stuartafbruff wrote:
>On 8/24/2009 5:01:12 AM, omorr wrote:
>== I hope this is not posted before. The

>Interesting, though, and I don't think
>I'd noticed
>this before, applying vectorzize to a
>transpose
>doesn't apply the tranposition to nested
>elements.
>However, if one defines a function
>'transpose' and
>applies vectorize to that, then the
>nested
>elements are transposed. I wonder if
>the
>vectorizing the transposition operator
>should
>affect the nested elements?
>
This should be reported as a bug, don't you think. Although it is present in Mathcad for a long, long time.

Radovan

[StuartBruff]

On 8/24/2009 10:13:49 AM, omorr wrote:
== I wonder if the vectorizing the transposition operator should affect the nested elements?
>> This should be reported as a bug, don't you think. Although it is present in Mathcad for a long, long time.

Yes, I think so, Radovan, but it would nice to get a few more views on the subject.

Stuart

[RadovanOmorjan]

On 8/24/2009 10:49:56 AM, stuartafbruff wrote:
>On 8/24/2009 10:13:49 AM, omorr wrote:
>== I wonder if the vectorizing the
>transposition operator should affect the
>nested elements?
>>> This should be reported as a bug, don't you think. Although it is present in Mathcad for a long, long time.
>
>Yes, I think so, Radovan, but it would
>nice to get a few more views on the
>subject.
>
>Stuart
Hello Stuart,

No response yet. I would not be surprised if this will remain in the final Prime.

Regards,
Radovan

[RichardJ]

On 8/24/2009 10:49:56 AM, stuartafbruff wrote:
>On 8/24/2009 10:13:49 AM, omorr wrote:
>== I wonder if the vectorizing the
>transposition operator should affect the
>nested elements?
>>> This should be reported as a bug, don't you think. Although it is present in Mathcad for a long, long time.
>
>Yes, I think so, Radovan, but it would
>nice to get a few more views on the
>subject.

I agree this should be considered a bug. Vectorize should force it to operate on each element for all functions and operators, not only some.

Richard

[RadovanOmorjan]

On 8/26/2009 11:15:02 AM, rijackson wrote:
>On 8/24/2009 10:49:56 AM, stuartafbruff
>wrote:
>>On 8/24/2009 10:13:49 AM, omorr wrote:
>>== I wonder if the vectorizing the
>>transposition operator should affect the
>>nested elements?
>>>> This should be reported as a bug, don't you think. Although it is present in Mathcad for a long, long time.
>>
>>Yes, I think so, Radovan, but it would
>>nice to get a few more views on the
>>subject.
>
>I agree this should be considered a bug.
>Vectorize should force it to operate on
>each element for all functions and
>operators, not only some.
>
>Richard

I am not quite sure now. It seems that some other operators are working the same way - making function first and after that - vectorize that function. Vector sum, Matrix column, Matrix row...It seems that any operator which can be used for the vector/matrix only, is working this way. It seems my mistake, sorry.

Regards,
Radovan

[StuartBruff]

On 8/24/2009 5:01:12 AM, omorr wrote:
== The Matcad have always the approach not to
transpose matrices inside matrices. Is this
correct?

As an aside, it was lot easier to enter the nested
array in Spirit than it was in M14 or M11
("Heresy! Burn him!" you may say, but it was
true). I drag-created a 1x2 vector, then drag-
created the 2x2 matrices in situ - unlike the
M11/M14 behaviour which inserts extra rows &
columns. Furthermore, the right arrow took me
from element to element, crossing the matrix
boundaries where appropriate.

So this gets another tick in the box from me - it
did what I thought was the intuitive thing to do.

I've yet to make my mind up whether I'd like ctl-M
to pop up a box (as per M11/M14) to get the
dimensions, or use the shft-space/shft-enter
method of expanding the single-element array that
ctl-M produces.

Stuart