On 18 Nov 2010, at 10:58, octave-maintainers-requ...@octave.org wrote: > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:58 +0100 > From: Philip Nienhuis <pr.nienh...@hccnet.nl> > Subject: Re: savevtk > To: Levente Torok <torok...@gmail.com> > Cc: octave-maintain...@octave.org > Message-ID: <4ce44ef6.5030...@hccnet.nl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Levente Torok wrote: >> Dear Philip, Carlo and octave-dev, >> >> I had a chance to polish things according to your commands. > > Thanks, I'll have a look at them. > >> However I have a few questions. >> >> Many of the codes do not fit into this scheme but I can accept that >> this is guideline for the future. >> >>> - 2 spaces rather than tabs (but I still use tabs in my own scripts so I >>> don't mind this particular one) >>> >>> - spaces between internal function name and left paren; no space between >>> array name and left paren or bracket >>> >>> - functions end with "endfunction" rather than "return" >>> >>> - appropriate end statements: if- elseif -else - endif / for - endfor / >>> while - endwhile / etc. >>> >> >> Why dont want we write code that maybe used with matlab too? >> This would be a benefit for all I believe.
<... snip ...> > According to Carlo, to some extent I am.... :-) (see his last mail/post > to me) I am not saying you are too picky :) All your comments about code style are correct and agreed upon by most Octave developers, but the common practice is to impose lower constrains on functions that are included in OF forge as compared to those that are meant to go into core Octave. This practice is motivated, among other things, also by an attempt to make life easier for contributors who, like Levente, are wishing to share their code with the community. So, in the case of OF packages, how strictly a function should adhere to coding standards is left to the judgement of the maintainer of the package in which the function will go, and different packages (even if maintained by the same person) may respect the Octave coding standards to a different degree. For example I myself am among the maintainers of both 'bim' and 'nurbs', but while in the former we have tried to stick to the coding standards as much as possible and to use texinfo docstrigs to get a nicer looking documentation, in the latter we decided to use '%' for comments and to avoid texinfo markup as it is a fork from a matlab toolbox and we did not wish to break matlab compatiblity. > If you want your scripts in the io package I could adapt the code > (-style) a bit further for you (and send them to you for review before > committing them), but if you want to retain ML compatibility I suppose > your scripts perhaps should rather be elsewhere in the svn trunk. It seems we all three agreed to some extent that probably 'fpl' is a more appropriate location for 'savevtk', my only concern in that case is to make the name a bit more descriptive to distinguish it from other fpl functions that save in other vtk formats. maybe 'save_vtk_lookup_table' or something similar? > Let me know what you want. Levente, if you decide to put your code into 'fpl' I can give you access to the OF svn so you can commit yourself. > Thank you Levente. > Philip Carlo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
