Re: [OctDev] Functions in the core

[Daniel J Sebald]

Jaroslav Hajek wrote:

> Maybe we differ slightly in the view of the development archive. IMO
> these are just patches that can easily be reverted. I didn't even yet
> add the functions to the build process, so that they won't be
> installed if someone uses a snapshot - they're just there for
> development testing. So I don't really regard my act as true addition.
> The discussion you call for has just started :)

Perhaps Hg and queues has changed the paradigm enough to necessitate some new 
setup.


> I don't basically object to a policy that the main archive should be
> regarded as a more sacred place. But as I have explained earlier, IMO
> this significantly clashes with the policy of having a linear archive,
> which makes parallel development for a longer time quite difficult.
> So, if that's going to happen, I think we should allow merges. I'll
> then happily use my experimental repo for most of my development.
> For instance, I've added a couple of new functions (and extended some)
> without discussing with anyone, mostly for use in other functions. I
> hope this is OK, at least nobody complained. Anyone is certainly free
> to raise objections to any of my patches.

That's always been the case, but it's difficult to follow the many patches of 
Octave.  (Things are really taking off.)  It's more a matter of people being 
aware of the changes.  Anyway, discussing on OctaveForge and then moving the 
result in Octave seems odd.


> 3. I don't understand the comment about translate being too general.
> Can you elaborate? What other (mathematical) meanings "translate" has
> other than move by a constant vector (i.e. a constant in 1D)?

You're right.  "Translate" has well understood meaning.  Multi-dimension as 
well as 1D.

Dan