arrayfun.m reworked

[David Bateman]

Thomas Treichl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have finished reworking arrayfun - finally I decided to find the bug 
> in arrayfun.m and not to send my arrayun.cc here. And thanks to David 
> for having a look at the cellfun problems I have had ;)

It appears that this changeset slipped through the cracks. Sorry, even 
though I made some bug fixes around this I fell back on the position 
that John would approve or not this patch.

>
> You have been right John, my implementation arrayfun.cc is still 
> slower then the current implementation because I used the C++ subsref 
> and subsasgn methods for all types of input arguments.
>
> The attached changeset includes the following changes to arrayfun.m:
>  - created new help text
>  - fixed bug in arrayfun function
>  - added a lot of test to check my compatibility needs
Except for a minor style fix, this seems fine. I pushed them to Savannah.

> I hope it is good enough to be included into the default development 
> branch.

Just sorry it took so long to get there.

>
> PS. I have created a similiar large testset for cellfun, should I 
> prepare a patch for this or is this some kind of overshooting?
No full coverage testing is a good goal to aim for. If you have tests 
for cellfun, I'd say to send them.

Regards
David


-- 
David Bateman                                dbateman at dbateman.org
35 rue Gambetta                              +33 1 46 04 02 18 (Home)
92100 Boulogne-Billancourt FRANCE            +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob)