This problem you mentioned could be considered as a bug in Matlab, but I guess The MathWorks might reply that Matlab does not expect classes (like those used in MIRtoolbox) to output a figure in a new window instead of displaying text in the Command Window. I propose two alternate solutions to that problem: 1. I found a way to hijack the recursive problem in Matlab by modifying one of the problematic file in Matlab, called arrayviewfunc.m This modified file (that you can find enclosed to this mail) can be added for instance in the main MIRtoolbox folder, so that it will be used instead of the original file. I just hope this will not cause any trouble when using Matlab Array Variable Editor in general. But this "hijacking" can be cancelled by simply removing that file arrayviewfunc.m in MIRtoolbox. 2. Alternatively, some users might prefer avoiding those automated figure creation when displaying MIRtoolbox results. I can add an option, called for instance mirfigure(0). And the "hijacking" could be turned off automatically when mirfigure is itself turned off. What do you think? Ideally, it would be great if we could hijack arrayviewfunc.m properly, so that it outputs the variable content in the Variable Editor. But we would need some Matlab expert for that. Anyone out there? Best, Olivier
Alexander Refsum Jensenius kirjoitti 9.11.2010 kello 16.57: > Hi, > > I am teaching with the MIRToolbox this semester, and I notice that several of > the students tend to double click on the variable name of a miraudio object > in the list of variables. This causes a cascade of waveform figures to > appear, and the need for some brute force methods to stop the windows popping > up. > > Is this intended behaviour? Is it possible to change it so that either you > only get one figure, or possibly get to see the data inside the variable > instead? > > Thanks, > Alexander