Re: A question on Matlab compatibility

[David Bateman]

Ron Crummett wrote:
> I get the impression that I have stirred the pot some with my queries 
> and I apologize for doing so.  That which has been identified as 
> complaining was not intended as such, but rather inquisitions as to why 
> some things have been done the way they have, and what it might take to 
> bring Octave more in line with Matlab compatibility from my 
> perspective.  Apparently, my perspective takes a much narrower view than 
> most others; I am more concerned about the cosmetics and assume 
> functionality is sufficient, whereas most others have a greater concern 
> about the functionality as well.  But I suppose painting the car won't 
> make it run any better.
> 
> That being said, I am very interested (as always) in helping toward the 
> greater improvement of Octave.  I just don't want to step on anyone's 
> toes by reworking something that they have done because I think it needs 
> some improvement, unless I know that all parties involved are okay with 
> that.  From this discussion, I have gathered that such is permissible.
> 
> -Ron

Hey, this is perhaps one of the most open and polite group of
open-source developers out there. No one is going to jump on you if you
contribute code. They might tell you how to improve it though :-)

D.