From help-octave-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Fri Dec 19 13:13:17 2003
Subject: Re: Investigating delaunay() segfault
From: "John W. Eaton" <jwe at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu>
To: Solignac <solignac at altern dot org>
Cc: help-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu, rafael@debian.org
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:13:09 -0600

On 19-Dec-2003, Solignac <solignac at altern dot org> wrote:

|   IMHO it may would be safer that delaunay() returns an error message a
| little bit more explicative that "core dump" (someting like "Maybe next time
| you'll read the man pages" :o) ).

Of course.  In http://www.octave.org/bugs.html, under the section
"Have You Found a Bug?", the first item in the list of guidelines
about how to decide if you have found a bug:

  * If Octave gets a fatal signal, for any input whatever, that is a
    bug.  Reliable interpreters never crash.

The question now is, is this a bug in Octave itself, or in the
delaunayn function from octave-forge that is dynamically linked to
Octave when you call the delaunay function, or qhull, or something
else?

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
-------------------------------------------------------------