[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development
From: |
Matthias Brennwald |
Subject: |
Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development |
Date: |
Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:33:22 +0200 |
Here's my opinion: Octave features that are additional to those in Matlab are
fine (and sometimes GREAT!), as long as there is a reliable method to identify
the use of these additional features (commands). Without this, developing code
that will run on Matlab becomes virtually impossible (yes, the ARE cases where
people prefer using Octave, but their code is used by others who run Matlab).
So, as long as the non-Matlab features are marked as such, things are fine for
me. If not, I prefer compatibility over extra features.
Matthias
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, (continued)
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Søren Hauberg, 2010/06/07
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/06/08
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Alois Schlögl, 2010/06/08
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/06/08
- Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Thomas Weber, 2010/06/08
- builtin vec() [was Re: Opinions ..., Alois Schlögl, 2010/06/09
- Re: builtin vec() [was Re: Opinions ..., Judd Storrs, 2010/06/09
- Re: builtin vec() [was Re: Opinions ..., Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/06/10
Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Judd Storrs, 2010/06/07
Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development, Alvin Wibowo, 2010/06/07
Re: Opinions on Matlab compatibility, Octave development,
Matthias Brennwald <=