octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GSOC 2013 - FEM LIBRARY


From: John W. Eaton
Subject: Re: GSOC 2013 - FEM LIBRARY
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 10:57:33 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12

On 05/31/2013 10:51 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
On 30 May 2013 21:48, c.<address@hidden>  wrote:
The idea of introducing an Octave namespace has come up many times,
but has never been done, does anyone recall why?

It's just work that has to be done.

We also need to figure out how to do this in a non-breaking way. I
think we should take the lessons from this blog post to heart;

     http://stevelosh.com/blog/2012/04/volatile-software/

Ideally, namespacing Octave classes should be done by some sort of CPP
magic (read: not C++) so that it can be selectively enabled.

I think it may be possible to do this. Then again, namespaced symbols
are in fact completely different symbols at object code, so perhaps we
can't do this without breaking backwards compatibility and further
angering Steve Losh.

I don't really care about angering (or not) Steve.

Yeah, maintaining backward compatibility is a reasonable goal, but it is not the only goal. If you always insist on maintaining obsolete interfaces, you tend to build up a lot of cruft, and that can be worse than breaking things now and then.

jwe



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]