Re: Function calls (Was: Save a plot to .ps)

[A+A Adler]

On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, John W. Eaton wrote:
> 
> I am quickly losing interest in the compatibility game.  As I see it,
> it is a losing proposition.  Complete compatibility has never been a
> goal of mine, and there are more interesting things that I can do with
> my time.
>
> If you think Octave should support some stupid Matlab feature in the
> name of compatibility, then implement it yourself, or hire someone to
> implement it.  If you want absolute compatibility (i.e., Matlab) then
> you know where to find it.  If you use Octave only because you think
> of it as a `Matlab clone' that you can get `for free', then I think
> you are missing the whole point of free software like Octave, so why
> should I care what you want?


You have convinced me that this syntax can't be supported without
ambiguity.

However, I don't think that this exercise of discussing it
was useless and a waste of time.

Matlab compatability _where possible_ is a _good thing_.

Discussion is also a _good thing_. It is the open source equivalent
of marketing requirements specification and engineering feasability
study.

John, its clear you aren't interested in implementing this.
It's also clear that you won't incorporate patches that anyone
else might make unless it could be done in an unambiguous way.

Therefore, it was important to have this discussion.

There are a lot of smart people on the octave discussion lists; and
its worthwhile seeing if anyone has a good idea of how it can be done.

______________________________________________________________
Andy Adler,                               address@hidden



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.  To ensure
that development continues, see www.che.wisc.edu/octave/giftform.html
Instructions for unsubscribing: www.che.wisc.edu/octave/archive.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------