From octave-maintainers-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu  Wed Jan 24 05:29:53 2001
Subject: Re: patch : [...] = leval(name, list)
From: Paul Kienzle <pkienzle at kienzle dot powernet dot co dot uk>
To: etienne at isr dot ist dot utl dot pt
Cc: octave-sources at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu, octave-maintainers@bevo.che.wisc.edu
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:09:05 +0000

Etienne,

I would expect to see this function under the name "apply" in the file
ov-list.cc, and indeed, I have looked for it there.  But maybe that's
just my lisp/scheme programming coming back to haunt me.

Note that you can do the same in Matlab using the syntax:

	feval("name", list{:})

or just

	name(list{:})

if you happen to know the name in your function.  This is even more
flexible, though the syntax seems strange at first.  Unfortunately,
it will be a hard thing to implement.

Paul Kienzle
pkienzle at kienzle dot powernet dot co dot uk

On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 11:40:14AM +0000, Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> 
>   Hello,
> 
>   I got convinced that a function [...] = leval(name, list) offers
> more flexibility than [...] = feval(name, arg1,...,argn). For example,
> such a function is useful for minimization of a function that takes
> many arguments.
> 
>   I first implemented it as a leval.m which works fine, but puts an
> overhead of ~4ms (PII,350MHz), which I think is too much (there may be
> hundreds of calls to it).
> 
>   It turns out that "leval" is very simple to implement as a built-in:
> see the patch (against 2.1.32) below. It works fine : I append a test
> script too. Run it after setting "verbose=1".
> 
>   Does that patch meet the coding standards?
> 
>   Etienne
> 
> 
> ======================================================================


> ======================================================================


>