|
From: | David Bateman |
Subject: | Re: Merging Octave and Octave-Forge? |
Date: | Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:05:41 +0200 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080725) |
John W. Eaton wrote:
In the case of the NaN toolbox the shadowing makes sense as it allows special treatment of NaN values in basic functions like mean and std as missing data. Though I agree in general shadowing is a bad idea.On 26-Aug-2008, Levente Torok wrote: | Perheps because Function cov() works differently on matlab and on| octave,In what way? Has this been discussed before?| Alois Schloegl and Matthew W. Roberts replaced the octave version with its own version in | the extra/nan-1.0.6 package. | In the installation README file, the authors suggests us to completely overwrite | the original /m/statistics/base/*.m,*.oct files.| This can be seen as an obstructive and collabortive act on behalf of octave-forgers. I think we should discourage people writing packages from replacing core functions. But I don't see that we can stop them from doing it. Perhaps Octave should warn about duplicate functions in the load-path? jwe
D. -- David Bateman address@hiddenMotorola Labs - Paris +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph) Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob) 91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax) The information contained in this communication has been classified as: [x] General Business Information [ ] Motorola Internal Use Only [ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |