octave-patch-tracker
[Top][All Lists]

## [Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #10288] Implementation of Matlab function

 From: Nicholas Jankowski Subject: [Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #10288] Implementation of Matlab function tensorprod Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 16:02:21 -0400 (EDT)

```Update of patch #10288 (project octave):

Status:                    None => In Progress

_______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comment #1:

thanks for the contribution!  i'm looking it over a bit now.

this is the first time I've seen an Octave implementaiton of the option form
used by tensorprod(...,NumDimensionsA=ndimsA). I do see it's behaving a bit
differently _outside_ the scope of the function in Octave vs matlab.  using
the example in the matlab help:

A = rand(3,4);
B = rand(3,4,5);
C1 = tensorprod(A,B,1);
C2 = tensorprod(A,B,1,NumDimensionsA=3);

in Octave:

>> whos
Variables visible from the current scope:

variables in scope: top scope

Attr   Name                Size                     Bytes  Class
====   ====                ====                     =====  =====
A                   3x4                         96  double
B                   3x4x5                      480  double
C1                  4x4x5                      640  double
C2                  4x1x4x5                    640  double
NumDimensionsA      1x1                          8  double
ans                 1x4                         32  double

Total is 237 elements using 1896 bytes

in Matlab 2022b:

>> whos
Name      Size               Bytes  Class     Attributes

A         3x4                   96  double
B         3x4x5                480  double
C1        4x4x5                640  double
C2        4x1x4x5              640  double
ans       1x4                   32  double

I think there's been some discussion on how to handle this option calling form
over at octave.discourse.group, but I don't think there's anything to be done
within the scope of you implementing this function. it looks like the
strcmp(strtok(inputname...)) approach does the job well enough.

will get back to you after I've had a chance to look it over and run some
matlab checks against it.

_______________________________________________________

<https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?10288>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

```