Re: "features" problems

[Carnë Draug]

On 19 March 2016 at 00:04, PhilipNienhuis <address@hidden> wrote:
> Carnë Draug wrote
>>
>> There may be a very limited set of things, currently in
>> octave_config_info,
>> that we can make public.  We should decide which ones.  Some can be tested
>> easily at runtime and already functions to do it (java and image io for
>> example).  I have started a list of those at the wiki [1].
>>
>> Which ones are tricky to test at runtime and should be exposed outside
>> core?
>
> [...]
>
> A little issue with the __have_feature__ method is that it isn't possible
> (or I have missed something) to find out e.g. , api version, or arch, or
> libdir. The io package makes use of that info as well.
> Of course workarounds can be thought up but they seem less robust to me than
> directly querying octave_config_info() or __octave_config_info__()

Why do you need api_version and libdir in the first place?  Those
would be among the ones that I'd guess should not be made public.

You can get arch (I'm assuming you meant arch of the host --- beware of
cross compiling) using computer ().

Carnë