Re: Manipulating history in iniitialization files

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

Hi Rafael!

On 9 March 2011 16:24, Rafael Laboissiere <address@hidden> wrote:

> First of all, thanks for your continuing effort in developing Octave.  I
> really appreciate it and I regret not having time to maintain the
> Octave-related Debian packages anymore.

Thanks to you! We're trying to keep up with the maintenance job you
handled for several years and we will hopefully manage to keep up with
the good work you did.

> My question/request today regards the code in src/octave.cc, where I read
> the following:
>
>    execute_startup_files ();
>    initialize_history (read_history_file);
>
> Is there a strong reason for the order of execution above?  If it was
> reversed:
>
>    initialize_history (read_history_file);
>    execute_startup_files ();
>
> then the history could be manipulated in startup files, like adding
> timestamps or the like.

It doesn't seem like anyone saw any drawbacks to your suggestion, and
it sounds like a good idea to me. Not sure if you've noticed, but
Octave has a bug tracker in Savannah now. Would you toss this
suggestion there? It might get less forgotten there than in our email
inboxes. Did you test it yourself already?

Thanks,
- Jordi G. H.