From maintainers-request at octave dot org Thu Feb 10 09:22:09 2005
Subject: Re: Moving code from octave-forge to octave [Was: polyderiv problem?]
From: "John W. Eaton" <jwe at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu>
To: David dot Bateman at motorola dot com
Cc: Paul Kienzle <pkienzle at users dot sourceforge dot net>,         octave maintainers mailing list <maintainers@octave.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 10:26:49 -0500

On 10-Feb-2005, David Bateman <David dot Bateman at motorola dot com> wrote:

| Paul Kienzle wrote:
| 
| > Keeping stuff in m-files as much as possible really is attractive.

Yes, I agree.  We should not convert everything to C++ just because we
can.

| If only the existing octave version could be made faster....

Probably it can be made faster.  It might be a lot of work, but so is
converting everything to C++ and then maintaining it.

Also, how often are tril and triu used?  I only see one use of triu
and none of tril in Octave's scripts directory, and none of either in
another relatively large collection of .m files written by a
colleague.

If it is really critical for some application that you have, then it
is easy enough to replace the .m version with your own .oct file.

jwe