implicit_str_to_num_ok=1

[Daniel Heiserer]

Hi,

I try to write my code non-braindead compatible 
IN ORDER TO POSTE IT TO THE SOURCE LIST, not for my own!
There are some non-braindead features which make me 
really sick.

Does anybody in this list runs with "implicit_str_to_num_ok=0"
or lets say *REALLY* *NEEDS* "implicit_str_to_num_ok=0".

If this is not the case I would recommend to make
"implicit_str_to_num_ok=1" the default and kick the feature
"implicit_str_to_num_ok=0" out.
Once I start fiddling around with strings this feature makes
be absolutely sick, because I cannot handle the BASE-DATATYPE 
of octave (The Matrix (not the movie ;-))) like a matrix
because no matrix manipulation works on it as long as this
dammed "implicit_str_to_num_ok=0" is set.

I personally don't see ANY adavantage of "implicit_str_to_num_ok=0"
except that the code tells me it makes no sense handling 
a string like a matrix. Why the hell not?

It is up to me to check that IF IT IS NECESSARY.

I just don't see any reason why making things more complicatet
as they are.

Bye daniel.

-- 
Mit freundlichen Gruessen
                                 Daniel Heiserer
-----
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dipl.-Phys. Daniel Heiserer, BMW AG, Knorrstrasse 147, 80788 Muenchen
Abteilung EK-20
Tel.: 089-382-21187, Fax.: 089-382-42820
mailto:address@hidden



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.  To ensure
that development continues, see www.che.wisc.edu/octave/giftform.html
Instructions for unsubscribing: www.che.wisc.edu/octave/archive.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------