dpb <email@example.com> wrote in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>... > On 10/16/2012 1:59 PM, Bruno Luong wrote: > > dpb <email@example.com> wrote in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>... > >> > >> Imagine the ugliness of implementing the last few of the above w/ the > >> new fancy-smantzy object-based solution. :( > >> > > > > Yeap. I think you get the picture now dpb. One short neat command > > INTERP1 (admittedly not obvious immediate usage for some) is replaced > > with a block of 5 commands and a for-loop. :-( > > Well, that picture I got that all along... :) > > I just hadn't seen the multi-directional case and wasn't aware that it > was incorporated into the current release of interp1. It was > ugly-enough for that simple first example case, it becomes even more so > at those more complex uses. > > TMW wants to upgrade the documentation; here's another example of the > contention I've made all along that the better path to upgrading it is > to improve the content and references rather than worrying about the > look and feel. > > --
What's missing is a decent set of examples like the one I just presented. There was a single example of this syntax in r2008b, and currently none in r2012a (presumeably since they did not want people to use it any more).