Re: Question on performance, coding style and competitive software

[John W. Eaton]

On 22-Apr-2009, Alois Schlögl wrote:

| (The programm slowed down on Matlab from 13.0 to 66.15 s, though).

If you care about this, then I guess you should complain to the
MathWorks about the performance of their product...

| BTW, what are the arguments in favor of using octave-only coding style ?

Some of us like it better.  Using endfor, endif, etc. is easier to
read.

| Yes, the question is closely related to the previous one. Of course, if
| the toolbox is compatible to matlab, there is no problem for the matlab
| users. Unfortunately, most toolboxes (all in Octave and
| octave-forge/main and most of octave-forge/extra) are using the
| octave-only coding style.
| 
| This seems to suggest that a fork is neccessary in order to make the
| toolboxes applicable for matlab users. Is there an alternative ?

Some of us don't see enhancing Matlab as a goal of the Octave or
Octave Forge projects.  The goal for us is to make Octave better by
writing code for Octave, not Matlab.  Making useful things available
in Octave packages should provide an incentive to use Octave.

jwe