[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73
From: |
Rafael Laboissiere |
Subject: |
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73 |
Date: |
Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:38:20 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
* John W. Eaton <address@hidden> [2006-03-16 13:12]:
> On 16-Mar-2006, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
>
> | > 50_octave-value-list-resize-2.9.dpatch
> | >
> | > I don't plan to make this change since I think we determined that the
> | > problem was due to a compiler bug, and I think that has since been
> | > fixed.
> |
> | This one is already applied to CVS HEAD.
>
> Hmm. Now I'm confused. The patch appears to move the body of the
> function
>
> void octave_value_list::resize (octave_idx_type n, const octave_value& val)
>
> from the oct-obj.cc to oct-obj.h, but in my current CVS sources, the
> body of the function is in oct-obj.cc file, so it seems the patch has
> not been applied.
FWIW, you posted this patch in:
http://www.octave.org/mailing-lists/help-octave/2005/4266
> I think you mean that 50_octave-value-list-resize-2.1 is the one
> related to the compiler bug and the other two are not included yet.
Yes, sorry for the mess.
> OK, I'll just update the .el files in the 2.1.x branch to be the same
> as the ones in the 2.9.x branch.
Thanks.
--
Rafael
- Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73, (continued)
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73, David Bateman, 2006/03/14
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73, David Bateman, 2006/03/14
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73, David Bateman, 2006/03/14
Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73, John W. Eaton, 2006/03/16