Re: package autoload

[Juan Pablo Carbajal]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Olaf Till <address@hidden> wrote:
> Let me first say that I'm sorry to speak up so late, now that pkg
> autoload support recently has been removed. My excuse is that I think
> such things should be discussed thoroughly at the mailing list -- not
> only at OctConf or privately -- and I waited for this discussion,
> thinking it would happen before such a change will be made. Maybe I
> have just missed it, then it is wholly my fault.
>
> There are two effects of this change:
>
> 1. A package can't force itself to be automatically loaded.
>
>    Most OF packages already complied to the policy not to do this, and
>    there was no considerable additional effort caused by this, so no
>    real objection from me here.
>
> 2. The user has to change a startup file if he wants a package to be
>    always loaded.
>
>    I think this is awkward, and I'd like to explain why.
>
>    Consider the case that a user installs a package with the intention
>    to have it always loaded. Then he has to make changes at two
>    different places: installing with 'pkg' and changing a startup
>    file. Having to make changes at two different places for something
>    which is intentionally an entity is not perfect design.
>
>    If a user uninstalls a package which was always loaded, he has to
>    remove a line from the startup file. Otherwise he'll get an error
>    at next startup, when pkg tries to load the package though it isn't
>    installed anymore.
>
>    If one often installs and uninstalls packages (assuming one wants
>    them to be always loaded if installed), the necessary changes in
>    a startup file are a nuisance.
>
> The things I mentioned as awkward could be avoided if there were a pkg
> command to permanently note that a package should be always loaded: At
> install, there'd be two different pkg commands necessary, or even only
> one pkg command with an additional option, not changes in the
> seemingly unrelated startup file. At uninstall, nothing additional
> would be necessary at all, since pkg would automatically forget the
> order to always load the package at package deinstallation.
>
> So at install, instead of:
>
> install package with pkg --- change startup file
>
> you would have:
>
> install package with pkg --- note package as autoload with pkg.
>
> These are effectively the same schemes, only the latter is cleaner and
> faster.
>
> At uninstall, instead of:
>
> uninstall package with pkg --- change startup file
>
> you would just have:
>
> uninstall package with pkg,
>
> of which the latter "scheme" is clearly shorter.
>
>
> Olaf
>
> --
> public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net

Olaf, wasn't you who recently argued in favor of following matlab
behavior regarding packages?
Toolboxes in matlab do not autoload (nor in any other language that I
know) without one modifying some startup file or including the toolbox
every time.
I might be wrong regarding the latest matlab versions. But if I am not
wrong, I must say that supporting opposing policies for similar Octave
behaviors is not helping us converge to a consensus.