Hello,
Le 07/04/2016 10:16, Clément David a écrit :
Hello (again) Scilab devs,
TLDR: I don't want to re-open the []+"" behavior change flame-war but just to
remove a
warning on working Scilab 6 code and ask you about the merge timing.
After the []+"" behavior change, the oldEmptyBehaviour has been introduced by
Pierre-Aimé to ease
the transition from Scilab 5 to Scilab 6. This will help user transitioning
using the beta version
and thanks to that we also fix some issues in Scilab itself.
However, the current implementation display a warning in both Scilab 5 enforced
and Scilab 6
execution mode. I proposed a patchset [1] to remove the warning in the Scilab 6
execution mode but
preserve it on the Scilab 5 mode (eg. after a call to oldEmptyBehaviour("on") ).
What's your thought about this change ? should we pass it now or after the
6.0.0 release ? Is the
beta cycle sufficient enough to manage the behavior change ?
I am afraid that i do not catch all what you mean.
With "Scilab 5 enforced execution mode", do you mean in Scilab 6 with
oldEmptyBehaviour("on") mode?
So, instead of using this mode to still ACCEPT and NOT warn users
whether []+a is met, it would warn users,
while in oldEmptyBehaviour("off"), meeting []+a would no longer warn users?
If what i understand above is right: imo, enabling users to ignore this
warning by masking it would be
quite "dangerous", because changing this behavior has consequences as
serious as quiet.
BTW:
* This would be a first case of Switch-warning-on-specific-case
application.
To be discussed in the "upgrade warning() thread"
* The discussion with Eric and other users is not a flame-war. The more
i modified my code about this feature,
the more i thought that even if "[]+a == a" is not "logical", it is
very handy, it does not hurt, and it prevents nothing.
Removing it compels to add as many if/then/else. /And what for/?
Best regards
Samuel
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
