[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Better name for cruft directory
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: Better name for cruft directory |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Apr 2017 08:59:15 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.6.0 |
On 04/21/2017 11:34 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
Faddeeva
--------
Some C++ code (actually may be C code that can be compiled as either)
related to only erf() functions. It has a fairly recent copyright of
2012, so I assume it must be used in some way, as fallback code or
something. Could this go in some other directory? I know there has
been a lot of development around erf so maybe there is a more logical
place.
Like most of the other code in cruft, this is code that is maintained
(or not) separately from Octave but for which there is no package
available in any Linux distribution that I know of, so we include a copy
in the Octave sources. So I'd like to keep files like this separate
from the rest of the Octave sources rather than dumping it in with other
Octave source code.
Misc
----
quit.cc,quit.h: Is Octave code, very short. Seems an odd place for
quit-related code to be since there is probably a lot of start/quit code
elsewhere.
These need to be in liboctave (previously, in libcruft) because they
need to be available for all of Octave, not just libinterp. When
libcruft was a separate library from liboctave, this location made more
sense.
cquit.c: Again, Octave code, very short. Could probably combine quit.cc
and cquit.c into one file in some way.
Maybe, but the reason it is separate is so that it will be compiled with
a C compiler, not a C++ compiler, in order to avoid warnings.
I moved the files in liboctave/cruft/misc to liboctave/util in this
changeset:
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/58d56f52d50a
For the rest, how about just renaming liboctave/cruft to be
liboctave/external?
jwe