ons, 22 04 2009 kl. 16:18 +0200, skrev Alois Schlögl: > BTW, what are the arguments in favor of using octave-only coding style ?
It's superior :-) I find reading code that uses Octave extensions are much more easy to read. Therefore, I heavily use them in my own developments. > This seems to suggest that a fork is neccessary in order to make the > toolboxes applicable for matlab users. Is there an alternative ? Even if we switched to using Matlab code style in all packages (not that I'm suggesting such a policy) you would still have the problem that some functions exist in Octave but not in Matlab. Should we then not allow their usage in Octave-Forge. I think there is more to portability then syntax. Søren ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
