Hi again,
Le 29/02/2016 08:16, Clément David a écrit :
Hi Samuel,
.../...
The dev@ ML is in fact the right place to discuss new features or how to
improve things. On the
"coverage" feature especially it has been mainly developed by calixte as a tool
to validate its
analysis pass (not as a well as a designed from scratch new feature).
On the team we asked ourself if we should integrate it or not as it was not in
the roadmap for 6.0.0
but is useful enough to be present. We decided to provide it (as an incomplete
dev) !
.
As is, one guesses and hopes that the 6.0 roadmap did nor plan to remove
code-profiling functions. Yet, former ones have been removed. As soon as
some useful functions are removed, shall they not be replaced with some
equivalent ones at least as featured and efficient as the former ones?
We should even write: _*Before*_ removing any useful features, a
replacement at least as good as the former features shall be provided.
This does not look like a matter of roadmap, just that no regression
should be roadmapped.
So, for my part, i sincerely do not understand why there should be any
question, among developers, as well as among users, about providing a
replacement ASAP, even if it is an experimental version. It shall simply
be tagged as experimental, as in the other hand obsolete functions are
tagged as is before removal.
Unless assessing code's efficiency is considered useless. Could it be
so, for a software that claims High Performance Computing capabilities?
I don't believe it for one second. On the opposite, it looks like a key
module.
About new functions themselves, i will post comments later, in a
specific thread.
Best regards
Samuel
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
