no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Per Bothner (14 Dec 2018 18:02 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Bradley Lucier (14 Dec 2018 19:01 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (15 Dec 2018 08:55 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Bradley Lucier (16 Dec 2018 23:34 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (17 Dec 2018 09:22 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Bradley Lucier (18 Dec 2018 01:34 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (18 Dec 2018 14:40 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Per Bothner (18 Dec 2018 02:30 UTC)
Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (18 Dec 2018 14:44 UTC)

Re: no feedback on srfi-164 Enhanced multi-dimensional Arrays Per Bothner 18 Dec 2018 02:30 UTC

On 12/16/18 3:33 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
> I've spent some time in the past few days reviewing what terms authors have used for cross products of one-dimensional real, bounded, intervals and found
>
> cuboid
> $d$-rectangle (in $d$ dimensions)
> parallelepiped
> box
> cell
>
> Some of these terms are already used in various programming languages.

But we're not talking about *real* intervals - we're talking about "intervals"
of (exact) integers.  Do mathematicians use the term "interval" for sets
restricted to consecutive integers or cartesian products thereof?

The term "shape" or "array-shape" is used by SRFI 25.
The work "shape" is also used by Racket, NumPy, and APL, though since all
only support lower bounds of 0, their shape is a simple vector.
--
	--Per Bothner
xxxxxx@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/