659
edits
User:Carandraug: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→octave code to write: extensions to is.. funcs
Carandraug (talk | contribs) (→octave code to write: demo and test changes) |
Carandraug (talk | contribs) (→octave code to write: extensions to is.. funcs) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
* make test and demo deal with tests and demos in .cc packages | * make test and demo deal with tests and demos in .cc packages | ||
:I don't like the first option. It's ugly and further pollutes the user namespace. And even if we have some Makefile that copies the .cc file at pkg install time, users won't know they have to make the call to test and demo differently. I guess demo and test functions would have to be modifed for that. I say just place the demos and tests on the .cc file. Later we can change pkg to copy the .cc file, and then change demo and test to look for those files if the function is .oct file. Tests are mainly used in development so users won't need them. Demos... well in the case of ellipj, it has not been working for a very long time so my guess is that people haven't been using it that much. What do you think?</pre> | :I don't like the first option. It's ugly and further pollutes the user namespace. And even if we have some Makefile that copies the .cc file at pkg install time, users won't know they have to make the call to test and demo differently. I guess demo and test functions would have to be modifed for that. I say just place the demos and tests on the .cc file. Later we can change pkg to copy the .cc file, and then change demo and test to look for those files if the function is .oct file. Tests are mainly used in development so users won't need them. Demos... well in the case of ellipj, it has not been working for a very long time so my guess is that people haven't been using it that much. What do you think?</pre> | ||
* {{codeline|isinteger (X, "uint8")}} and {{codeline|isfloat (X, "single")}} | |||
=== octave-forge to do === | === octave-forge to do === | ||