[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?]
From: |
Paul Kienzle |
Subject: |
Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?] |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Feb 2005 21:51:53 -0500 |
Patches are from the early, early days of octave-forge, and I no longer
maintain them in any sense. I want everything in octave-forge to work
on an unpatched version of octave. Feel free to delete.
As for automatic duplication, yes I would like to see an updated
version of this patch included in Octave. We should count the number
of times it occurs in octave-forge to see if it is worthwhile. I find
the alternative hard to read and slower than it ought to be.
- Paul
On Feb 9, 2005, at 10:50 AM, David Bateman wrote:
I looked at the patches directory of octave-forge and it seems that
all of the patches here, except one are either already included in the
main part of octave or superseded by other changes to octave. The only
remaining patch to consider is M-v-ops-2.1.31.patch that allows the
extension of ./, .*, etc to allow Matrix by vector arguments. Its not
clear how this ports to NDArrays, since in fact the NDArray
generalization means that singleton dimensions in one of the args
should force the matrix to be duplicated allow that dimension of the
other arg.
Do we want to do that? In any case, matlab doesn't support this
behavior, and it might hid some dimensioning errors from the since
something like "randn(N,1)+randn(1,N)" would create an N-by-N
matrix... It is clear however, that the existing patch is of no use as
a basis for this as it is against an octave version prior to the
introduction of NDArrays. So all of the patches in octave-forge might
be dumped...
- Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/09
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/09
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], Paul Kienzle, 2005/02/09
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/10
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/10
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], Paul Kienzle, 2005/02/10
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/10
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], John W. Eaton, 2005/02/10
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], Geordie McBain, 2005/02/11
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/23
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], Paul Kienzle, 2005/02/23
- Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?], David Bateman, 2005/02/24