The ipf posted above is a good workaround for this use case IMO. I explain that a Table is not like a spreadsheet and explain about 1D waves. When showing somebody Igor for the first time. However, I think that spreadsheets and Igor are diammetrically opposed. However, I think that spreadsheets and Igor are diammetrically opposed. I thought I'd chime in at this point to say: I know exactly what you mean. This is a convention that "sticks" for novice users and seasoned programmers alike. IOW, it should be wrapped in an in-built operation Spreadsheet.
I also suggest that, the development should be folded in to Igor Pro as though it is a built-in "package". Otherwise, novice users will drop it and go on to something else.
#IGOR PRO MATRIX TRANSPOSE HOW TO#
The translation for spreadsheet -> Igor Pro has got to be as easy as possible for them it has got to be "oh, I see how to do this", not "oh, I'll have to _learn_ how to do this". By novice, I mean "anyone who has essentially no clue how to program anything at all". I suggest that, when considering the inclusion of spreadsheet options in Igor Pro, the discussion must start from this question: Does this method support the ability for a NOVICE USER to step in to Igor Pro and "see" spreadsheet commands. Food for further thought.Ĭhemistry / Chemical & Materials Engineering, UAH I see that I missed the option to set subranges, as can be done in a spreadsheet. ) Igor Pro has got to be as easy as possible for them it has got to be "oh, I see how to do this", not "oh, I'll have to _learn_ how to do this". * Translations of the syntax from a spreadsheet to Igor Pro is not exactly preserved in all cases. For example, where do you get the results after you do the average (. * The return for a spreadsheet operation is "hidden". Even so, I see three "problems" with this approach.
#IGOR PRO MATRIX TRANSPOSE DOWNLOAD#
Unfortunately, I have (yet) to download the Igor Pro 7 beta.
Wide-Angle Neutron Spin Echo Spectroscopy.Of course this takes nothing away from the other arguments, mostly that $A$ is not the right type of matrix to be considered the matrix representing the linear map $M\mapsto M^T$ (and not to mention the problem you would have for the case of non-square matrices, for which $M\mapsto M^T$ is still a linear transformation). See also this answer to a related confused question. This is similar to the coefficients of a polynomial function of$~x$: these coefficient by definition cannot involve$~x$. While describing a linear transformation as a map involves, like for any map, an expression that gives the result in terms of the argument (as here $M\mapsto M^T$), the matrix representing the linear map must by definition contain constant entries, values that do not depend on the argument (here $M$) the linear map is potentially going to be applied to. I will give the expression for the case of a square matrix $M_$, you are making a matrix $A$ that depends on the argument $M$ that the map is being applied to. I thought I would clarify that the transpose is a linear operation by explicitly giving the set of linear operations that need to be performed on the original matrix to get its transpose.
0 kommentar(er)
