From bug-octave-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Wed Oct 15 20:01:03 2003 Subject: ignore_function_time_stamp & script files From: "John W. Eaton" To: taltman at lbl dot gov Cc: bug-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:01:00 -0500 On 15-Oct-2003, taltman at lbl dot gov wrote: | I think I might have found a bug, or this might be the intended | behavior. When I have multiple functions defined in a script file, and | I update the script file, it seems that the Octave interpreter doesn't | realize that the script file's internal function has been | updated. I've noticed this behavior on | | GNU Octave, version 2.0.15 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu) | GNU Octave, version 2.1.40 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu) | | I also have ignore_function_time_stamp set at "system", not "all". | | Could someone give some insight into this? There is no connection between the name of the script file and the functions, so Octave doesn't know that it should do anything to get newer definitions of the function(s) defined in the script. I'm not sure that this is a bug. If a function is defined in a script file, we could tag the internal function definition with the name of the file, then have Octave check the timestamp of the file, same as for function M-files (those that define only one visible function). But what should Octave do if the timestamp changes? If the script does more than define functions, then I think some really strange behavior would result (calling a function again could produce many unexpected side effects). I think it is best to leave it up to the user to decide when to run the script again. jwe ------------------------------------------------------------- Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL. Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html -------------------------------------------------------------