octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Geometry Chapter of the manual


From: Quentin Spencer
Subject: Re: Geometry Chapter of the manual
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:48:40 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)

David Bateman wrote:

Quentin Spencer wrote:

The addition of the sparse matrix dependencies seemed to cause a fair
amount of confusion on the help list. I have no problem with adding more
dependencies, but maybe we need to make it clearer to people who want to
compile octave themselves that they are optional. I don't know how to do
that--any ideas? Maybe there should be a document somewhere telling
people how to install the development packages for common
distributions--that one seems to trip people up a lot.


Quentin,

Yes adding a dependency means that Octave becomes progressively harder
to build. However, it also means the addition of new functionality with
the minimum work on the part of the Octave developers. There is a
compromise to achieve hear and I think its normal that the addition of
each new dependency to the core of Octave should be considered on a case
by case basis with some discussion of interested parties.

So in particular, in your opinion, does the inclusion of the convhull,
convhulln, delaunay, delaunay3, delaunayn, griddata, tsearch, voronoi
and voronoin function justify the inclusion of the dependency on QHull?
Are these functions of sufficiently large value to accept the cost of a
harder build of Octave?

I don't mind extra dependencies. I was just trying to point out that we're going to get more questions from people trying to compile octave themselves and maybe we need a better way of explaining how to get all of the dependencies, or explaining that some of them are optional.

Quentin



reply via email to

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