Re: Array constructor backward compatibility problem

[John W. Eaton]

On 20-Jan-2011, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:

| I'm OK with this. It's sad that we can't keep the interface
| consistent, but it's probably better this way.

Consistent to what?

I think it is better to work only with dim_vector and avoid any
possibility of ambiguity here, especially when people are migrating
code and they can get mysterious crashes when trying to compile previously
working code with the new interface.

| I thought I had also some optimization-related reason why I wanted
| these, but now I can't see it. Maybe it was something that went away
| anyway.

You did have both

  void resize (octave_idx_type nr, octave_idx_type nc,
               const T& rfv = resize_fill_value ()) GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED
  {
    resize2 (nr, nc, rfv);
  }

  void resize (const dim_vector& dv, const T& rfv = resize_fill_value ());

and the first is not defined in terms of the second, nor is it a copy
and paste job.  However, the version that takes the dim_vector
argument forwards to the other when there are just two dimensions.  So
I preserved the deprecated function as resize2, but made it private as
I think it is only needed inside the Array class.  The forwarding takes
care of the rest of the cases with only the slight overhead of
creating a dim_vector object.

jwe