659
edits
FAQ: Difference between revisions
→QtOctave has been abandoned. Why are you working on yet another GUI rather than trying to fix QtOctave?: link to Jacob Dawid blog post
Carandraug (talk | contribs) m (use Codeline template) |
Carandraug (talk | contribs) (→QtOctave has been abandoned. Why are you working on yet another GUI rather than trying to fix QtOctave?: link to Jacob Dawid blog post) |
||
| Line 764: | Line 764: | ||
===QtOctave has been abandoned. Why are you working on yet another GUI rather than trying to fix QtOctave?=== | ===QtOctave has been abandoned. Why are you working on yet another GUI rather than trying to fix QtOctave?=== | ||
Read previous question. The approach taken by QtOctave for interacting with Octave is bound to fail. Yes, it could be fixed and made to work again for the latest octave release but this would not be a permanent fix | Read previous question. The approach taken by QtOctave for interacting with Octave is bound to fail. Yes, it could be fixed and made to work again for the latest octave release but this would not be a permanent fix and would eventually fail again. A [http://octave-gsoc2012.blogspot.ie/2012/06/why-not-take-existing-gui.html longer explanation] has already been written as part of GSoC2012. | ||
Yes, QtOctave is a useful tool, looks beautiful and we are thankful to its developers for working on such a nice tool plus making it libre. We are in no way saying the opposite. However, it will ''never'' be stable. The Octave GUI being developed now uses code from many different projects, we are trying to not reinvent the wheel. But we want something that will achieve stability. | |||
===What about GUI Octave?=== | ===What about GUI Octave?=== | ||