Re: Octave 3.6.1 mingw for windows - updated

[PhilipNienhuis]

marco atzeri-2 wrote
> 
> On 4/5/2012 5:09 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>> On 5 April 2012 10:59, Lukas Reichlin<lukas.reichlin.lists@> 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05.04.2012, at 15:34, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2012/4/5 Sébastien Villemot<sebastien.villemot@>:
> 
>>> Jordi, I don't quite get it. Why do you want users to type "pkg
>>> load" every time if they chose to install the packages?
>>
>> No, they can add it to their .octaverc. I think it's important for
>> another reason: educate user that some functions are in packages and
>> some are in core. And also, to educate users that there is such a
>> thing as an .octaverc, in which they can add their customisations.
>>
>> If Windows had a nicer packaging infrastructure, it would be nice if
>> you could say "pkg install package" and the package would install
>> forever. Sadly, it doesn't, and "pkg install" is essentially useless
>> in Windows, so I think "pkg load" (and perhaps patching pkg load to
>> add that command to .octaverc?) is the next best thing.
>>
>>> And you don't have to load matlab toolboxes either.
>>
>> No, but you have to buy them. It's not unusual for people to write
>> Matlab scripts without using certain functions from some toolbox
>> because they want to make sure their users can use them regardless of
>> which Matlab toolboxes they may have installed.
>>
>> I think in this case, trying to make things too convenient for users
>> doesn't expose them to the intricacies of the underlying problems, so
>> they end up with other problems, such as for example, reporting OF
>> problems to the wrong place, or being unaware of the relative quality
>> and standards of core Octave and its packages.
>>
>> - Jordi G. H.
> 
> 
> additionally all toolboxes loaded will make octave start up time longer.
> 

I reported earlier about this in a thread about the MSVC installer.
On my 2.5 GHz Core Duo, the extra load time for about 80 OF packages is
about 1.5 secs; compare that to the total load time of Octave MinGW 3.6.1,
which was somewhere around 22 secs.

So package load time looks a bit irrelevant to me.

Philip

--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Octave-3-6-1-mingw-for-windows-updated-tp4442128p4535569.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.