263
edits
Online Developer Meeting (2021-10-26): Difference between revisions
Online Developer Meeting (2021-10-26) (view source)
Revision as of 16:35, 26 October 2021
, 26 October 2021→Todays topics
(Copy topics from last meeting. Add two potential topics for this meeting.) |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
* Which version numbers to update in which files on (minor) release? (CITATION file?) | * Which version numbers to update in which files on (minor) release? (CITATION file?) | ||
* Update of merge date for Octave 7.x? | * Update of merge date for Octave 7.x? | ||
=== Importance of allowing Octave headers in C language sources === | |||
Some header files in Octave have been written to allow them to be compiled by a C compiler. It is not clear whether anyone really needs to do that and it adds somewhat to the cost of maintaining Octave to ensure that this goal is met, even for just a few of the public header files. Would it be OK to change Octave so that public header files require a C++ compiler? And would it be OK to make this change in version 7 without deprecating and preserving the current coding style for two release cycles? | |||
See bug report [https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61370 61370] and also comments 39 and 40 in [https://octave.discourse.group/t/using-m-prefix-for-member-variables-in-c-classes/1517 this discourse discussion] for some motivating examples of cases where it might be simpler to expect that Octave header files will be compiled by a C++ compiler. | |||
=== Fallback topic: <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> works differently on POSIX and Windows === | === Fallback topic: <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> works differently on POSIX and Windows === | ||
| Line 23: | Line 29: | ||
* On Windows, <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> also replaces the current process. But each process has a distinct id on Windows. I.e., the new process gets a different process id from the original one. Another process (like a terminal) waiting for the original process id will resume once the '''original''' process terminates. (The same happens with <code>exec</code>.) That leads to issues when trying to use the <code>octave.exe</code> wrapper on Windows. | * On Windows, <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> also replaces the current process. But each process has a distinct id on Windows. I.e., the new process gets a different process id from the original one. Another process (like a terminal) waiting for the original process id will resume once the '''original''' process terminates. (The same happens with <code>exec</code>.) That leads to issues when trying to use the <code>octave.exe</code> wrapper on Windows. | ||
* Could we use <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_WAIT</code> instead? IIUC, that would require passing the return code from the spawned process. What else? | * Could we use <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_WAIT</code> instead? IIUC, that would require passing the return code from the spawned process. What else? | ||
== Previous topics == | == Previous topics == | ||