On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Jesse Rosenstock <jmrosenst...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> If there is no complaints/observations/comments in 3 days I will move >> them to inst. > > Would it make sense to have the interface more like this? > > http://www.mathworks.co.uk/help/toolbox/stats/nnmf.html > > That is, one nnmf function, where the algorithm is chosen by an > 'algorithm' argument, and the other args are named as similarly as > possible? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. > Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. > Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 > _______________________________________________ > Octave-dev mailing list > Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Yes, it makes more sense. I got the DTU:NMF toolbox[1] under GPLv3 and I will work on it, but my TODO list is long and I thought to add first (at least) the algorithms independently, since they need to be there anyway. [1] http://cogsys.imm.dtu.dk/toolbox/nmf/index.html -- M. Sc. Juan Pablo Carbajal ----- PhD Student University of Zürich http://ailab.ifi.uzh.ch/carbajal/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
