On Thursday, February 05, 2009, at 12:36PM, "Joshua Redstone" <
address@hidden> wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ben Abbott <
address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 5:52 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
>>
>> On 1-Feb-2009, Ben Abbott wrote:
>>>
>>> | I tried to merge your changes, and modified the proper ChangeLog.
>>> | Using the final result, the first test fails for me (I've attached the
>>> | changeset).
>>>
>>> Instead of adding options as individual arguments, I think we should
>>> be using optimset.
>>>
>>> jwe
>>>
>>
>> Good point. I'll put it on my long list of things I hope to get to ;-)
>>
>> However, if someone (Josh?) has the initiative, no need to wait on me!
>>
>> Ben
>>
>I don't mind making a small change to use optimset, but I couldn't find any
>documentation on it except for some terse matlab stuff.
>In the meantime, I updated the test - the H is positive definite, so
>hopefully should be more robust across platforms, though I'm fuzzy on the
>qp() internals wrt math.
>Attached is diff for qp.m
>Josh
>
Josh, dd you forget the attachment?