Re: Renaming oct-obj?

[Rik]

On 12/18/2015 12:39 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 12/17/2015 07:20 PM, Rik wrote:
>
>> After spending a lot of time with octave_value_list in the code lately, I'm
>> wondering why this class is located in libinterp/corefcn/oct-obj.h?  It
>> would seem more natural if it was called ovl.h in analogy with ov.h.  And I
>> would naturally go looking for it in the octave-value directory, rather
>> than the corefcn directory.  I have a changeset that implements these two
>> ideas unless you see a problem with it.
>
> I agree that oct-obj.h is a terrible name.  Changing it to ovl.h is fine
> with me.  However, since this header is included in many files, we should
> probably replace the current oct-obj.h with a file that does something like
>
>   #warning oct-obj.h has been deprecated; use ovl.h instead
>   #include "ovl.h"
>
> instead of just removing it completely in the next release.

Good idea.  I made that addition and then renamed everything in this cset
(http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/48b2ad5ee801).

>
>> Also, I think it would be a good idea to add an instance of ovl() which
>> takes no arguments and returns an empty octave_value_list.
>
> That seems reasonable to me.
>

I added the new function in the cset above.  I renamed all instances of
"return octave_value_list ()" to "return ovl ()" here
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/a4f5da7c5463.

--Rik