Talk:FAQ: Difference between revisions
Carandraug (talk | contribs) (→Installing octave packages: replying) |
(→Matlab / Octave Comparison: new section) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Because we have no control over them. If you want, you could make an octave package and host it in your homepage, there's nothing we can do about it. Packages are independent of Octave core. Please don't use the Talk pages of the wiki for placing questions since few follow this. Questions should be made on the mailing list http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/support.html | Because we have no control over them. If you want, you could make an octave package and host it in your homepage, there's nothing we can do about it. Packages are independent of Octave core. Please don't use the Talk pages of the wiki for placing questions since few follow this. Questions should be made on the mailing list http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/support.html | ||
---- | ---- | ||
== Question 11.6 about why qtoctave has been abandoned makes reference to a link which has been removed == | |||
Question 11.6 asks why QtOctave was abandoned instead of being worked on, and notes that the approach taken by QtOctave was bound to fail. | |||
It then states: | |||
''A [http://octave-gsoc2012.blogspot.ie/2012/06/why-not-take-existing-gui.html longer explanation] has already been written as part of GSoC2012.'' | |||
But that link to the longer explanation has been removed. | |||
Surely somebody must have cached the contents somewhere? Or does somebody have an exact phrase from the blog that one could use to search for the article somewhere? | |||
== Use of Simulink == | |||
In the section on Simulink it is stated that 'Typically the simulink models lag research and are less flexible, so shouldn't really be used in a research environment'. This implies an extremely narrow definition of 'research' and seems to me to be a quite inappropriate comment. There are many fields of research in which the use of something like Simulink is very sensible. I think it should be removed or revised, but as an outsider I don't want to do so without discussion. | |||
== Matlab / Octave Comparison == | |||
This is the year 2015. The comparison between matlab and Octave in this wiki is from 2010. '''5 years ago''' Can somebody with access to both programs provide an '''up to date''' comparison. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.46.180|77.99.46.180]] 17:11, 9 February 2015 (PST) | |||
Latest revision as of 01:11, 10 February 2015
Is there any information about the "text" file format used by octave?[edit]
i am especially interested whether I can add a comment to a file saved in that format, to document the meaning of the data saved in different variables. Is there anything I should know lest to "destroy" the content (make the file unreadable for the load function)?
is there already any documentation about this format - and where do I find it?
- I don't think it's a missing FAQ since it's not a FAQ (frequently asked question). The talk pages of the wiki are not a good place to ask question since they are very rarely seen. You should try to ask on the octave help mailing list. --carandraug 10:39, 16 July 2012 (PDT)
Installing octave packages[edit]
"...one should not install all octave packages... Some packages conflict with each other, some are broken, others are just crappy and will break your system."
As a new user, my comment would be "so why haven't you removed the crappy and/or broken ones?"
Perhaps this could be more delicately worded?
--joannac 14:48, 13 October 2012 (PDT)
Because we have no control over them. If you want, you could make an octave package and host it in your homepage, there's nothing we can do about it. Packages are independent of Octave core. Please don't use the Talk pages of the wiki for placing questions since few follow this. Questions should be made on the mailing list http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/support.html
Question 11.6 about why qtoctave has been abandoned makes reference to a link which has been removed[edit]
Question 11.6 asks why QtOctave was abandoned instead of being worked on, and notes that the approach taken by QtOctave was bound to fail.
It then states:
A longer explanation has already been written as part of GSoC2012.
But that link to the longer explanation has been removed.
Surely somebody must have cached the contents somewhere? Or does somebody have an exact phrase from the blog that one could use to search for the article somewhere?
Use of Simulink[edit]
In the section on Simulink it is stated that 'Typically the simulink models lag research and are less flexible, so shouldn't really be used in a research environment'. This implies an extremely narrow definition of 'research' and seems to me to be a quite inappropriate comment. There are many fields of research in which the use of something like Simulink is very sensible. I think it should be removed or revised, but as an outsider I don't want to do so without discussion.
Matlab / Octave Comparison[edit]
This is the year 2015. The comparison between matlab and Octave in this wiki is from 2010. 5 years ago Can somebody with access to both programs provide an up to date comparison. Thanks. 77.99.46.180 17:11, 9 February 2015 (PST)