Re: matconcat

[Andreas Enge <andreas.enge@inria.fr>]

Hello,

I agree with Charles on your question, which should not be surprising given
that anyway I am a bit wary of the philosophy "try to make sense of all inputs,
provided the specification can be documented in an elegant way", with the
inherent danger of computing surprising results upon typos. The fact that quite
a few different suggestions have been made suggests that there is no canonical
way of defining a meaningful output other than an error when dimensions do not
match.

A user can easily provide building blocks of the required dimensions using
matdiagonal, for instance, or c*matid(d), or matrix(m,n) for simple
building blocks of the right dimension.

Andreas