Re: why do we still have stdnormal_{cdf,inv,pdf,rnd}?

[John W. Eaton]

On 19-Feb-2009, Søren Hauberg wrote:

| tor, 19 02 2009 kl. 14:49 -0500, skrev John W. Eaton:
| > Does anyone know if there is some reason that these functions have not
| > been moved to the deprecated directory yet?  It seems that Matlab uses
| > the names normcdf, norminv, normpdf, and normrnd, and Octave also has
| > those now.  So unless anyone objects, I think we should move these to
| > the deprecated directory before the 3.2 release.
| > 
| >   stdnormal_cdf
| >   stdnormal_inv
| >   stdnormal_pdf
| >   stdnormal_rnd
| 
| It makes sense to do so.

Oops, I started to move the stdnormal_X functions to the deprecated
directory, but then noticed that they are much different from the
corresponding norm_X functions.  Since I don't know why they are
different, I'm leaving them in place.

| Out of curiosity: what happens to functions in the deprecated directory?
| I assume they are removed at some point. For how many releases do they
| stay? Are there any functions that should be removed for 3.2?

When functions are moved to the deprecated directory should have a

  ## Deprected in version M.N

comment added to them noting the version of the next major release.
I think we should remove them after they have been in the deprecated
directory for some number of major releases (2? 3?).

jwe