On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:06:10PM +0200, c. wrote: > > On 24 May 2010, at 10:39, Thomas Weber wrote: > >> Ignoring the bug report, > I do not want the bug report to remain ignored, I am willing to help > find a fix, just not this way.
I meant this in the sense of "even without the bug report". I guess it's fair to say that this is not a real bug in the ocs package. >> the issue of start-up time for Octave remains. > I don't think there is any measurable performance hit due to the more > directories added to the path, can you show any numbers supporting > this? With quite some octave-forge packages installed (actually, all that are in Debian currently; v.m contains just an exit; command); $ time octave v.m <snip> real 0m2.820s user 0m2.168s sys 0m0.112s without any packages: real 0m0.423s user 0m0.236s sys 0m0.048s So, the difference is measurable. However, most people will probably have longer sessions, where start-up time isn't a big issue. Measuring the influence of a bigger loadpath isn't as straightforward as startup time, though. >> What's the benefit of having the files separated? > The directory subdivison follows the logical structure of the design of > OCS, I beleive keeping the code well organized helps a lot in > explaining and understanding how it works, at least it has been very > useful for me in the past when explaining it to students. That explains. >>> ocs is not the only package containig subdirectories, why do you see >>> this problem only for ocs? >> >> That's a good question. I'm looking into it. >> >>> why is wrong to assume that PKG_ADD be in the directory above the >>> code >>> directories? >> >> FHS[1] mandates that architecture-dependent and architecture- >> independent >> files are separated. We put PKG_ADD files into the >> architecture-dependent directory, because they normally influence only >> the .oct files. > The assumption that PKG_ADD influences .oct files only is wrong in > this case and I beleive there are other such cases, is it possible to > reconsider the choice of putting PKG_ADD in the arch > dependent directory? Reconsidering this is obviously a choice. However, as it seems that currently only ocs is hit by this, I'm looking for something else. >> [1] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ > I'll have a look at the link and see if it helps me find out a way > around this problem Hold your horses. This is a distribution-specific problem. Moving all .m files into one directory would be an easy solution, but your explanation for the split-up is fair. Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
