On 28.02.2012, at 19:13, Přemysl Vrba wrote:
> Greetings,
Hi Přemysl,
Thanks for your report. I forwarded it to the octave mailing lists (Octave and
OctaveForge) as it not only concerns me in my role as the maintainer of the
control package. Please keep the mailing lists in Cc for future reque
Ping on the discussion below. I really would like to settle this once
and for all and stop this petty war we've been having about shadowing
core functions and then enabling warnings when core functions are
shadowed.
I think skipping NA instead of NaN would be desirable and a good agreement.
Alois
Hi,
Is there any reason to have statistics-1.1.0/combnk.m which seems a
slower implementation of combinatorics-1.0.9/combs.m?
Maybe is a bad idea to have statistics depending on combinatorics?
Quick benchmark:
octave> t0=cputime(); combs(1:10,5); cputime()-t0, t0=cputime();
combnk(1:10,5); cput
On 28 February 2012 15:03, Eric Barnhill wrote:
> Hi, don\'t know if you have time to answer a quick question
> about installing this package, if not I can post on
> octave-help. I have installed the gdcm package as suggested,
> but still get the following errors. On the off chance that I
> have m
On 28.02.2012, at 16:02, Juan Pablo Carbajal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Octave 3.6.1 is giving warnings about polyderiv being used. I run a
> grep -r in the repository and found several uses.
> I acted upon package signal, geometry and mechanics.
>
> I did not touch control or control-legacy
>
> Here are
Hi,
Octave 3.6.1 is giving warnings about polyderiv being used. I run a
grep -r in the repository and found several uses.
I acted upon package signal, geometry and mechanics.
I did not touch control or control-legacy
Here are the matches
./extra/control-legacy/inst/tfout.m:## @seealso{polyval, p
