[Top][All Lists]

[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: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:35:49 -0500

On Feb 10, 2005, at 10:43 AM, John W. Eaton wrote:

On  9-Feb-2005, Paul Kienzle <address@hidden> wrote:

| I'm reluctant to force lock-step upgrading of octave and octave-forge
| which is the consequence of purging the cruft. A community poll may be | required here. How many people use an old version of octave with a new
| version of octave-forge?

When I install octave-forge, it is usually done with apt-get, so I
assume I'm getting a compatible and up-to-date version.  I've never
tried installing a new version of octave-forge with an old copy of
Octave.  But I might not be a typical user.

That's true for me as well.  However, some systems only come with
older versions of Octave.  Rather than forcing a recompile to the
latest version of Octave in order to install octave-forge, I try
to support older versions, at least to some extent.  Moving the core
compatibility functions to octave (especially interpolation routines,
but a lot of trivial routines as well) would reduce demand for
octave-forge considerably.  I believe signal and image processing
are the next most heavily used.

Most of the time, I don't have octave-forge installed on the systems I
use because it replaces functions that are already in Octave,
sometimes with undesirable (or at least unexpected) results.  I'd be
much more willing to always install octave-forge if I knew that it did
not include functions that overlap with ones already in Octave.

Obviously octave-forge has nothing of value to you because everything
you need you include in octave ;-)

You should not be seeing unexpected or undesirable results from
installing octave-forge.  If you are, then it is a bug in octave-forge
and should be reported.  Note that the NaN toolbox is not installed by
default because it changes the statistics functions to ignore NaNs.

- Paul

reply via email to

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