On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:51 AM, John W. Eaton
<address@hidden> wrote:
On 20-Apr-2009, Judd Storrs wrote:
| Suppose I go ahead and write a set of limited utility functions that only
| use Matlab mex that convert complex matrices into C99-form (causing all
| sorts of data copying when used in Matlab). Would octave be allowed to
| implement them more efficiently?
As I see it, your functions for Matlab would not be part of the Matlab
MEX interface and your functions for Octave would have to be written
using Octave internals, so they would be subject to the terms of the
GPL.
Correct.
That's why there will be two separate versions of the library. A BSD-licensed version for use in Matlab or octave and a separate GPL-only version for use in octave. People coding using the library would impose a performance penalty on Matlab. C99 accessors are exactly as useful for coding on Matlab's mex
interface as octave's non-C99 accessors are for coding on octave's mex
interface. This isn't accessing hidden earth-shattering features of
octave. Octave didn't invent the interleaved complex layout.
I have to write code that runs on matlab and octave and I prefer to use C99. Even on matlab the library would be personally useful. I personally prefer octave and am entertained by the prospect of tarballing Matlab users. The library makes perfect sense to me.