[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: getstruct, setstruct, etc.

From: David Bateman
Subject: Re: getstruct, setstruct, etc.
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 16:24:37 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

According to Paul Kienzle <address@hidden> (on 07/23/04):
> Rather than having a different m-file for each version, I would
> rather have a simple preprocessor which accepts a version number.
> I'm not sure if this is better done as a load-time feature (i.e., if it 
> is part
> of octave), or a build time feature.  Either way it's a separate 
> problem.

It doesn't have an m-file for each version. The makefile is marked with the
version that obsoletes the file. That the the above case is for an m-file
that is obsoleted after 2.1.50 and 2.1.57 for example.

If we wanted to be even fancier we could have the files named something like
foo.m.2.1.50, and bar.m.2.1.57, and then have the install script install them
or not. The basic oct-files could be handled similarly in that the configure
script would move foo.cc.2.1.50 or not depending on the build version. In
this case the maintainer of the code would have very little work.

> In the spirit of independent packages the deprecated files should
> continue to live in the usual directory.
> On the other hand, in the spirit of full disclosure functions which
> modify octave behaviour should be isolated in FIXES.

Humm, to think about then...


David Bateman                                address@hidden
Motorola CRM                                 +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph) 
Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin    +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax) 
91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE

The information contained in this communication has been classified as: 

[x] General Business Information 
[ ] Motorola Internal Use Only 
[ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary

reply via email to

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