Re: laguerre.m functions in specfun package

[Philip Nienhuis]

Carnë Draug wrote:
> On 25 April 2015 at 15:56, Philip Nienhuis <address@hidden> wrote:
> > After Colin has tidied up a bit in the OF specfun package, I'm planning to
> > make a new release of it.
> >
> > The package in the mercurial repo contains two laguerre.m functions, one in
> > inst/, the other in devel/
> >
> > The latter looks to be a bit more elaborate (it contains a demo and perhaps
> > more aptly named variables), to compensate for that it is lacking a bit in
> > coding style and lacks the one comment line that was present in the original
> > (?) one in inst/.
> >
> > So, any advice about which laguerre.m to retain?
>
> "hg log" tells me this is work from Juan Carbajal who was trying to merge the
> existing laguerre with laguerrepoly from the miscellaneous package:
>
>      o  changeset:   144:88d235233c5e
>      |  user:        jpicarbajal
>      |  date:        Sun Apr 14 19:33:57 2013 +0000
>      |  files:       devel/laguerre.m
>      |  description:
>      |  specfun: unifying laguerre and laguerrepoly
>
> Also, the plan was to simply move the whole specfun package into the
> unmaintained section.
>
> https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?44533#comment3

Hmmm, I missed that part of the discussion (although I commented there 
initially).

I wouldn't mind keeping specfun around a little longer, esp. now that 
Colin pimped the heaviside and dirac functions.
His suggestion to move them to core is probably too late for 4.0.0 so I 
suggested to temporarily have them in a new specfun release, see 
https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?8644#comment4

As far as I'm concerned that could be the last specfun release then; it 
could have a dependency added on Octave < 4.2.0

So, what shall I do?

Philip