<version.h> versus "version.h"

[Rik]

jwe,

I notice that we have some inconsistency in the #include style for
version.h and defaults.h.  If this is intentional, fine, but a comment
should be added.  Otherwise, I would use "version.h" to indicate the file
is a local include.

corefcn/toplev.cc:#include <version.h>
corefcn/interpreter.cc:#include <version.h>
corefcn/defaults.cc:#include <version.h>

corefcn/help.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/load-save.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-hdf5.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-mat-ascii.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-mat4.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-mat5.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-oct-binary.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/ls-oct-text.cc:#include "version.h"
version.cc:#include "version.h"
corefcn/defun-int.h:#include "version.h"
options-usage.h:#include "version.h"

And likewise for defaults.h

octave-value/ov-usr-fcn.cc:#include <defaults.h>
octave-value/ov-mex-fcn.cc:#include <defaults.h>
octave-value/ov-dld-fcn.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/variables.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/utils.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/oct-hist.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/help.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/dynamic-ld.cc:#include <defaults.h>
corefcn/defaults.cc:#include <defaults.h>

corefcn/interpreter.cc:#include "defaults.h"
corefcn/load-path.cc:#include "defaults.h"
corefcn/ls-mat5.cc:#include "defaults.h"
corefcn/pager.cc:#include "defaults.h"
corefcn/toplev.cc:#include "defaults.h"
octave-value/ov-fcn-handle.cc:#include "defaults.h"
octave-value/ov-java.cc:#include "defaults.h"
octave.cc:#include "defaults.h"
version.cc:#include "defaults.h"

--Rik