[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A question on Matlab compatibility
From: |
David Bateman |
Subject: |
Re: A question on Matlab compatibility |
Date: |
Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:43:58 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060817) |
Ron Crummett wrote:
> I have always been under the impression that to be included in
> Octave-forge, some requirements must be satisfied, in order to prevent
> anybody from writing some simple script and submitting it, only to have
> the rest of us in fits because we don't know how to use it.
You have no obligation to use any code on octave-forge, and the policy
on octave-forge has always been to be very open with what is accepted.
> In the cases I have mentioned, I don't think it would be hard at all to
> provide more compatibility between Octave and Matlab. For example,
> Matlab has the series function that performs a multiplication of two
> cascaded systems. Octave has a function by the same name and with the
> same functionality, but when it is called displays a warning encouraging
> its users to use sysmult instead, a function whose name lends itself
> well to its performance.
The matlab control toolbox relies heavily on matlab classes, something,
that although discussed recently, octave doesn't yet have. Therefore
although the minor change you want to make seems easy, what then? Just
making this change will not even come close to making the two toolboxes
compatible. Until someone comes forward adds classes and then fixes the
control toolbox, then this is a lost cause.
> Perhaps a break-off of Octave-forge is needed, some sort of general code
> repository similar to the Matlab Central exchange. Octave-forge could
> be preserved with the goal of Matlab toolbox compatibility (again,
> that's how I've always seen it) and Octave-central (call it what you
> will) could be a third-party code submission where people submit their
> task-specific code.
If you want to support a fork yourself you're welcome to it.
> To be honest, I could go on and on about improvements I'd like to see in
> Octave and its' attendant websites, but you've all heard enough from me.
I'm sorry, when I hear complaints like yours the typical response, "well
you know where the code is. Fix it".
D.
- A question on Matlab compatibility, Ron Crummett, 2006/09/15
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, A. Scottedward Hodel, 2006/09/15
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Ron Crummett, 2006/09/16
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Joe Koski, 2006/09/16
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Ron Crummett, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility,
David Bateman <=
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, John W. Eaton, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Ron Crummett, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, David Bateman, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Peter Jensen, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, David Bateman, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Paul Kienzle, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, Paul Kienzle, 2006/09/17
- Re: A question on Matlab compatibility, John W. Eaton, 2006/09/17