Re: Renaming oct-obj?

[John W. Eaton]

On 12/17/2015 07:20 PM, Rik wrote:

> After spending a lot of time with octave_value_list in the code lately, I'm
> wondering why this class is located in libinterp/corefcn/oct-obj.h?  It
> would seem more natural if it was called ovl.h in analogy with ov.h.  And I
> would naturally go looking for it in the octave-value directory, rather
> than the corefcn directory.  I have a changeset that implements these two
> ideas unless you see a problem with it.

I agree that oct-obj.h is a terrible name.  Changing it to ovl.h is fine 
with me.  However, since this header is included in many files, we 
should probably replace the current oct-obj.h with a file that does 
something like

  #warning oct-obj.h has been deprecated; use ovl.h instead
  #include "ovl.h"

instead of just removing it completely in the next release.

> Also, I think it would be a good idea to add an instance of ovl() which
> takes no arguments and returns an empty octave_value_list.

That seems reasonable to me.

jwe