Re: TableForm and MatrixForm
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg53684] Re: TableForm and MatrixForm
- From: Bill Rowe <readnewsciv at earthlink.net>
- Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 03:52:34 -0500 (EST)
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
On 1/21/05 at 12:31 PM, drbob at bigfoot.com (DrBob) wrote:
>>>This is particularly useful in that I don't have to remember to
>>>remove the Head MatrixForm before using the results in subsequent
>>>computations.
>Yes, this is still important in version 5.1, where TableForm and
>MatrixForm STILL do not act like the wrappers (not affecting
>computation) that documentation claims they are.
I agree the documentation could be made much clearer.
>(Execute this, for instance.)
>m = TableForm[{{1, 2, 3}, {4, 6, 5}, {9, 8, 7}}];
>Transpose@%
>Transpose@m
>The first output is properly transposed, but the second is not.
Hmm... here "5.1 for Mac OS X (October 25, 2004)", both give identical outputs with neither showing a transposed matrix.
>I don't like defaulting to TraditionalForm output, however, since
>it's not hard to come across tables that (a) I don't think of as
>matrices (even if they're in the right shape), and (b) matrices too
>large to fit the screen in TraditionalForm.
Obviously, YMMV. But for me your (a) is never a problem mainly becuase about the only use I have for TableForm is in a report for others rather than a working notebook. And as for your (b) I find none of the standard output forms suitable for very large matrices. In this case, I will want to display only a portion of the matrix using Take or Short. All in all, I find TraditionalForm to be best choice most of the time.
--
To reply via email subtract one hundred and four