-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 77
Writing MatlabOpaque objects to MAT-files #208
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
foreverallama
wants to merge
9
commits into
JuliaIO:master
Choose a base branch
from
foreverallama:wr-subsys
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+668
−129
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
dc7e37f
Rearrange methods for readability
foreverallama 4026a63
Add some subsys methods to save objects
foreverallama dd1c995
Full subsystem code, some updates to writers to support writing subsy…
foreverallama 32c678a
Some fixes to writing filewrapper metadata
foreverallama 8416fc2
Fix dimensions of data in filewrapper
foreverallama 7b846dc
Write nested objects in subsystem
foreverallama 3c85b70
Improve MAT_subsys readability
foreverallama 46c56aa
Fix: Write empty dicts as 0x0 structs in HDF5
foreverallama 1d9e8bb
Update empty struct handling; Add tests
foreverallama File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added the ability to write empty dicts as 0x0 structs over here. The subsystem data works with 0x0 structs as well in MATLAB.
This eliminates the need for any new struct markers for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Alright. Are 0x0 structs also read as empty dicts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup, all of 1x0, 0x1 and 0x0 are read as empty dicts already. But I hardcoded 0x0 for empty dict during write.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So this might go against the point raised in #214 where an empty dict is being written as a 1x1 struct with no fields. Instead I guess we could either:
__dims__that contains a tuple with the dimensions. I think its very unlikely to require reading 1x0, 0x0 structs (without fields), we just need write functionalityWhat do you suggest?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a rather special corner case. I'm okay with a new type that we keep internal for the writing, and then we can always consider to refactor later: