Editing Online Developer Meeting (2022-01-25)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* Blocking issues: 9 bugs targeting 7.0.90 (see [https://octave.space/savannah/# Savannah overview on octave.space]) | * Blocking issues: 9 bugs targeting 7.0.90 (see [https://octave.space/savannah/# Savannah overview on octave.space]) | ||
* Most important ones (in no particular order): | * Most important ones (in no particular order): | ||
** bug {{bug|61788}}: arrays of type int16 contain wrong numbers | ** bug {{bug|61788}}: arrays of type int16 contain wrong numbers] | ||
*** | *** Will probably be reverted before Octave 7. | ||
** bug {{bug|61813}}: memory management bug when calling MEX that returns an output | ** bug {{bug|61813}}: memory management bug when calling MEX that returns an output] | ||
*** | *** Issue if Octave is compiled with C++17, while the mex file not. @jwe checks on this. | ||
*** maybe also: <code>malloc</code>-<code>delete[]</code> combination in the .mex interface | |||
*** | ** bug {{bug|61821}}: segfault using tree_parameter_list in oct file] | ||
*** Lower priority, only conditionally reproducible. | |||
** bug {{bug|61898}}: subsref: Error when field syntax is used on non-scalar @class object] | |||
*** Needs reproducible example without interval package. Similar bug {{bug|61843}} reported. | |||
** bug {{bug|61821}}: segfault using tree_parameter_list in oct file | * A few package releases with fixes for Octave 7 were pushed to mxe default, e.g. https://hg.octave.org/mxe-octave/rev/d601436d29f2 (ga, control, communications) | ||
*** | ** Should those changes be applied to the "release" branch? -YES. | ||
** bug {{bug|61898}}: subsref: Error when field syntax is used on non-scalar @class object | |||
*** | |||
* A few package releases with fixes for Octave 7 were pushed to | |||
** Should those changes be | |||
* Revisit load path caching: https://octave.discourse.group/t/rfc-remove-faulty-load-path-caching/2136 | * Revisit load path caching: https://octave.discourse.group/t/rfc-remove-faulty-load-path-caching/2136 | ||
** Improving the caching strategy is the way to go | ** Improving the caching strategy is the way to go. | ||
=== C++17 features in Octave API? === | === C++17 features in Octave API? === | ||
Line 36: | Line 31: | ||
* Should we announce that possible requirement for some time in the future with the release of Octave 7? | * Should we announce that possible requirement for some time in the future with the release of Octave 7? | ||
* See also: [https://octave.discourse.group/t/should-octave-switch-to-c-17-if-so-when/2114 Should Octave switch to C++17? If so, when?] on Discourse. | * See also: [https://octave.discourse.group/t/should-octave-switch-to-c-17-if-so-when/2114 Should Octave switch to C++17? If so, when?] on Discourse. | ||
=== GSOC 2022 opening soon === | === GSOC 2022 opening soon === |