Re: Simulink for Octave

[xavion]

Jwe – I’d be happy to clink the tip jar.

I read your paper called “Octave: Past, Present, and Future”.  I certainly
view myself as a pesky "customer” needing help, a bug fix, or a new feature
without contributing.  I don't have time to contribute so I'm willing to pay
as a customer.  My passion is modeling and making projects, specifically
autonomous robots and UAVs – developing a language is not my goal.  But I do
believe in Octave.  Its compatibility with Matlab was a very smart decision
and mitigates the learning curve.

In-my-humble-opinion, I hope you keep the compatibility intact, at least
with bare “Matlab”.  I don’t see how that stifles innovation if you and the
Octave community develop unique “toolboxes” not yet invented by Matlab. 
Keep them on the run.  You can turnaround a new toolbox quicker than
Mathworks because large corporations tend to be slowed by their own inertia. 
Plus your price can not be matched.  

As a “customer”, I will hold to my recommendation for a basic Simulink
capability.  That will save your users considerable time modeling.

Another recommendation... to entice more Octave users to CONTRIBUTE, why not
create an Autocode toolbox that will let users develop new & unique
toolboxes in Octave code, and have the toolbox generate the underlying
source code in “C” or some other preferred language selected by the Octave
community.  That could lead to a watershed of contribution and innovation.

I’m very happy to have discovered Octave.  And whether you know it or not,
you make Matlab a better tool.  Ultimately, the research community, modelers
and “makers” like myself win.  Thank you.

Xavion


--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Simulink-for-Octave-tp3746480p3762107.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.