lør, 27 03 2010 kl. 19:02 +0100, skrev Arno Onken: > >> I can understand this viewpoint. However, I must say it seems wrong > >> to maintain to versions of the same function. As you have already > >> seen, this leads to situations where bugs are fixed in one version > >> but not in another. > >> > >> Does anybody have thoughts on how we should deal with this situation? > >> > > > > I totally agree that this is a tricky situation, but removing it would > > leave some users stranded. > > Does anybody object if I simply replace the 'statistics' package version > of the prctile function by the core Octave version? The current > version in the 'statistics' package follows the 'R way'. Replacing it > would restore compatibility with Matlab.
I think it would be better to simply remove the function (so we don't get in this situation again). This does, however, seem to cause problems for some users. So, how about updating the function as you suggest, but then we remove it when Octave 3.4 is released? Søren ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
