[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave's fstat vs. statistics package fstat
From: |
Søren Hauberg |
Subject: |
Re: Octave's fstat vs. statistics package fstat |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Dec 2010 21:37:43 +0100 |
tir, 21 12 2010 kl. 15:38 -0500, skrev John W. Eaton:
> Now that Octave will warn about package functions that hide core
> functions, anyone who installs the statistics package from Octave
> Forge will get a message about the fstat function from the package
> shadowing Octave's fstat function even though Octave's fstat function
> is deprecated.
>
> In this particular case, maybe we should just remove fstat instead of
> deprecating it and keeping it around for a release cycle. It was
> likely not used much, and it is trivial to fix code that did use it
> (just call stat instead of fstat).
>
> Or, since I'm not sure it makes sense to get a warning about hiding a
> function that will eventually be removed anyway, should we take a more
> general approach and change Octave to not warn when a deprecated
> fucntion is hidden by some other function in the path?
For how many functions is this actually a problem? If 'fstat' is the
only "criminal" we've got, then I'd say just remove it and forget about
the more general solution.
Søren