12
edits
User talk:Kri: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→repmat different syntax: re
Carandraug (talk | contribs) (→repmat different syntax: reply) |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:::: --[[User:Carandraug|carandraug]] ([[User talk:Carandraug|talk]]) 02:41, 22 September 2014 (PDT) | :::: --[[User:Carandraug|carandraug]] ([[User talk:Carandraug|talk]]) 02:41, 22 September 2014 (PDT) | ||
:::::If the function is implemented later in Matlab than it is in Octave, then I guess it is not much to do about it. And in this case, if the alternative syntax also exists in Matlab, then I guess it is not a problem either. | |||
:::::What I mean is that if we support alternative syntaxes that don't exist in Matlab, Octave scripts that use those syntaxes will not be portable to Matlab unless they are rewritten. And people will continue to use the alternative syntaxes unless they are completely removed from Octave, so people will (accidentally) continue to write scripts that are not portable to Matlab. That I see as a problem. This is of course not possible to avoid if we develop a functionality before Matlab, as in the examples you mentioned. —[[User:Kri|Kri]] ([[User talk:Kri|talk]]) 03:13, 22 September 2014 (PDT) | |||