[Scilab-users] Why window() provides only symmetric weighting?

[Claus Futtrup]

Hi Federico

Thank you for being open to finding the right word.
I think other members of our small group should also be open.

For me the plurality is not so important - but let's say it's the 
wording used in all our educational books (in English) ... just dig into 
any Signal Analysis book, etc., and what we're trying to name here is 
exactly that, then it would be bad for Scilab to give it a different 
name. Renaming something that is universally defined otherwise is an 
uphill battle we cannot win.

Asymmetric window functions is new to me.I googled about window 
functions and found (stumbled upon):
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/1748-3018.9.4.389
Conclusion: Asymmetric window functions have a purpose. When there's 
asymmetric windows, then there must also be symmetric windows.
Here's a short list of symmetric window functions: 
https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ApodizationFunction.html

Best regards,
Claus

On 12-04-2021 17:19, Federico Miyara wrote:
>
> Samuel:
>
> As a general concept, you are right ... but with nuances. The problem 
> is deciding when something is really wrong and when it is just a 
> question of opinion or personal preference. It is wrong to say the 
> Earth is flat, no matter how many people say it. But is it right or 
> wrong to call something just a conventional name?
>
> For instance: Is it right to call the derivative of a function 
> "derivative"? Probably not, because "derivative" is a general concept 
> which seems to have no relationship with its meaning in math. Probably 
> in its origins it was more related to grammar than to math. But once 
> established for centuries, it wouldn't be convenient to change it on 
> the basis that it is "wrong".
>
> By the same token, calling "periodic" a window function obtained from 
> periodic functions (cosines) whose period is equal to its length 
> doesn't seem intrinsically wrong to me. Calling it "closed" would be 
> worse since one immediately thinks either of a closed set, which is 
> not, or a closed curve, which isn't either.
>
> But even if we found a better word, changing it would very likely 
> create an unnecessary cognitive dissonance to thousands or millions of 
> practitioners.
>
> Anyway, if a much better and cristal-clear word (i.e., whose meaning 
> would be immediately obvious in its context) were found and gained 
> consensus, no problem to use it instead of "periodic". The important 
> thing in my proposal was to include in the window() function the 
> feature, not how we call it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara
>
>
>
> On 12/04/2021 04:22, Dang Ngoc Chan, Christophe wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> De : Federico Miyara
>>> Envoyé : dimanche 11 avril 2021 02:08
>>>
>>> Like it or not, I guess these keywords come from Matlab, and as Matlab
>>> still seems to dominate the market, many people, including those
>>> willing to quit Matlab (as I did several years ago), are quite used to
>>> those keywords
>> I don't agree with this argument.
>> If a way of doing is wrong, then just keep on going because "everybody does so" is just an argumentum ad populum
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>
>> which is a fallacious argument.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan
>> Mechanical calculation engineer
>>
>>
>> General
>> This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error), please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.
>> _______________________________________________
>> users mailing list
>> users at lists.scilab.org
>> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 
> 	Libre de virus. www.avast.com 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.scilab.org
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20210412/1095976b/attachment.htm>