Re: A group in Norway starts to develop support for multidimensional arrays in Octave.

[Ole Jacob Hagen]

Hi. 

Release-suggestion: 

If a newer release of Octave appears during the next couple of weeks, it
should be a 2.2 release, with some more functionality from Octave-forge.

A question; When will sparse matrix support appear in the Octave-core,
and thereby removed from octave-forge? This packages has been at
octave-forge, for some time now??? Paul, what do you say?

Wouldn't it be nice to offer sparse matrix support as well as
multidimensional arrays support in an Octave 3.0. 


Some time aspects to relate to.....

The summer-students at NTNU, believe that support for M-D arrays will be
complete or at least the basic M-D operations are complete, in early
august, since it's back to school.

This would imply that an 2.2 version has a short life, 
and is then 2.2 release really wanted to release? 

John, does not have time to maintain two releases. I guess, if someone
volunteerly to maintain an "unstable" Octave, they are welcomed. But, I
believe that this discussion was closed some years ago......

I know the problems, that people don't use Octave 2.1, and some are
actually using 2.0 version. I've tried to tell them that an 2.2 or 3.0
release is just around the corner. 

And if an 3.0 includes an early version of Graphics handler, which is
compatible with Matlab's syntax, this would be terrific. 
(Oplot++, Nice, it is....<Yoda-English>, use the horce Luke, use the
horce...)


I guess this mail has summarized some of my opinions regarding the
release question. 


Ole 

May the horce be with you.







 






On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 02:53, Andy Adler wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, John W. Eaton wrote:
> > Related to all this, I've been thinking about a complete overhaul of
> > the way matrix objects are handled in Octave.  For example, instead of
> > having many different octave_value types to support various types of
> > matrix objects, we could have one for all matrix-like objects.  But
> > this will be a lot more work, and I'm not sure whether it is really
> > feasible at this point.  It could break a lot of code.  OTOH, if this
> > is something that would improve and simplify the internals of Octave,
> > then it will only break more code if the change is delayed.
> 
> John,
> 
> I propose that, instead of making any large changes now, that you
> release octave 2.2 or 3.0 as soon as possible. This is important
> because 2.0 is essentially unsupported now, and people are
> reluctant to use an unstable (2.1) version.
> 
> The recent releases have been very stable. Adding a few features
> from octave-forge, and releasing a 2.2pre series now would get
> a lot of testers to flush out remaining bugs.
> 
> This will allow an overhall of matrix objects to be under less
> time pressure.
> 
> Andy