Sun 02 Apr 2017 06:21:26 AM UTC, comment #2:
Running
every run has a different result. How could it be?
|
Mon 27 Mar 2017 09:31:40 PM UTC, comment #1:
I'm getting different output. On octave 4.2.1 with image 2.6.1:
on matlab 2016b:
So that's at least a compatibility concern.
and then with the test:
it seems like octave's conndef supports non-compatible syntax. I.e., matlab only likes the third version of:
best I can tell from the help, conndef(6) should be the same as conndef(3,'minimal'), so:
runs without problem and produces a small image of what appears to be a black U overtop of white pixels. Saw the same error for octave.
|
Mon 27 Mar 2017 05:11:51 PM UTC, original submission:
Not sure at the moment if this is a single bug or multiple bugs. These are probably inherited from the strel class and some of optimisations we do, so they probably also affect other functions
|