[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?
From: |
Olaf Till |
Subject: |
Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ? |
Date: |
Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:10:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 11:49:10AM +0100, Julien Bect wrote:
> Le 09/02/2016 11:29, John W. Eaton a écrit :
> ...
> >It would help me if I see an example of where the current behavior is
> >useful.
> ...
> 2) In a situation where a package requires its users to provide a handle to
> a function, say F(x), and then decides to extend the interface with an
> additional argument, say F(x, y), the existing behavior makes it possible
> for the package developer to switch to the new interface unconditionally,
> without requiring the user to modify its own functions.
> ...
> For the second point, Olaf Till had an example involving the optim package.
> See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-octave/2009-08/msg00074.html.
For an example I would rather point to the second post of this current
thread. Or are there more details needed?
Olaf
--
public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Julien Bect, 2016/02/08
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Olaf Till, 2016/02/08
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Julien Bect, 2016/02/08
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Nicholas Jankowski, 2016/02/08
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Julien Bect, 2016/02/09
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Colin Macdonald, 2016/02/09
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, John W. Eaton, 2016/02/09
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?, Julien Bect, 2016/02/09
- Re: Why does Octave ignore additional input arguments ?,
Olaf Till <=