Mercurial > octave
diff scripts/signal/movfun.m @ 30893:e1788b1a315f
maint: Use "fcn" as preferred abbreviation for "function" in m-files.
* accumarray.m, accumdim.m, quadl.m, quadv.m, randi.m, structfun.m,
__is_function__.m, uigetfile.m, uimenu.m, uiputfile.m, doc_cache_create.m,
colorspace_conversion_input_check.m, imageIO.m, argnames.m, vectorize.m,
vectorize.m, normest1.m, inputname.m, nthargout.m, display_info_file.m,
decic.m, ode15i.m, ode15s.m, ode23.m, ode23s.m, ode45.m, odeset.m,
check_default_input.m, integrate_adaptive.m, ode_event_handler.m,
runge_kutta_23.m, runge_kutta_23s.m, runge_kutta_45_dorpri.m,
runge_kutta_interpolate.m, starting_stepsize.m, __all_opts__.m, fminbnd.m,
fminsearch.m, fminunc.m, fsolve.m, fzero.m, sqp.m, fplot.m, plotyy.m,
__bar__.m, __ezplot__.m, flat_entry.html, profexport.m, movfun.m, bicg.m,
bicgstab.m, cgs.m, eigs.m, gmres.m, pcg.m, __alltohandles__.m, __sprand__.m,
qmr.m, tfqmr.m, dump_demos.m:
Replace "func", "fun", "fn" in documentation and variable names with "fcn".
author | Rik <rik@octave.org> |
---|---|
date | Mon, 04 Apr 2022 18:14:56 -0700 |
parents | 796f54d4ddbf |
children | 597f3ee61a48 |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/scripts/signal/movfun.m Mon Apr 04 11:22:26 2022 -0700 +++ b/scripts/signal/movfun.m Mon Apr 04 18:14:56 2022 -0700 @@ -227,29 +227,29 @@ ## Obtain function for boundary conditions if (isnumeric (bc)) - bcfunc = @replaceval_bc; - bcfunc (true, bc); # initialize replaceval function with value + bcfcn = @replaceval_bc; + bcfcn (true, bc); # initialize replaceval function with value else switch (tolower (bc)) case "shrink" - bcfunc = @shrink_bc; + bcfcn = @shrink_bc; case "discard" - bcfunc = []; + bcfcn = []; C -= length (Cpre); Cpre = Cpos = []; N = length (C); szx(dperm(1)) = N; case "fill" - bcfunc = @replaceval_bc; - bcfunc (true, NaN); + bcfcn = @replaceval_bc; + bcfcn (true, NaN); case "same" - bcfunc = @same_bc; + bcfcn = @same_bc; case "periodic" - bcfunc = @periodic_bc; + bcfcn = @periodic_bc; endswitch endif @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ ## FIXME: Is it faster with cellfun? Don't think so, but needs testing. y = zeros (N, ncols, soutdim); parfor i = 1:ncols - y(:,i,:) = movfun_oncol (fcn_, x(:,i), wlen, bcfunc, + y(:,i,:) = movfun_oncol (fcn_, x(:,i), wlen, bcfcn, slc, C, Cpre, Cpos, win, soutdim); endparfor @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ endfunction -function y = movfun_oncol (fcn, x, wlen, bcfunc, slcidx, C, Cpre, Cpos, win, odim) +function y = movfun_oncol (fcn, x, wlen, bcfcn, slcidx, C, Cpre, Cpos, win, odim) N = length (Cpre) + length (C) + length (Cpos); y = NA (N, odim); @@ -300,10 +300,10 @@ ## Process boundaries if (! isempty (Cpre)) - y(Cpre,:) = bcfunc (fcn, x, Cpre, win, wlen, odim); + y(Cpre,:) = bcfcn (fcn, x, Cpre, win, wlen, odim); endif if (! isempty (Cpos)) - y(Cpos,:) = bcfunc (fcn, x, Cpos, win, wlen, odim); + y(Cpos,:) = bcfcn (fcn, x, Cpos, win, wlen, odim); endif endfunction