[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #32053] matlab/Octave differences for complex

From: Michael Godfrey
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #32053] matlab/Octave differences for complex
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 03:49:35 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110103 Fedora/3.6.13-1.fc14 Firefox/3.6.13

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #32053 (project octave):

I agree with John's comment that this discussion should move to
the maintainers list.  It deserves a wider audience.

My final comments here are:

1. Is it still good practise for improved performance to preallocate
variables.  For example:
A = complex(zeros(100,), zeros(100));  ?
If so, it might be good to actually do the allocation.

2. I asked around the lab (ISL, Stanford) about how Matlab
does this.  A typical response was by Stephen Boyd who said:

"i m not a wizard, nor even a fan, of matlab.

it's extremely poorly designed, as examples like this show."

Others were less positive. 

So, I would argue that in this case doing it right should be
given some serious thought, within all the usual constraints
including "reasonable" compatibility with Matlab.

My own hope is that Octave will not only be freely available
and widely used, but will also  demonstrate the high 
quality that is attainable in this framework.  



Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]