[Scilab-Dev] Private functions in a .sci file <= Re: Multiple Functions in a sci file

[Tan Chin Luh]

Hi,

i am sorry to had overlooked this thread. So is it confirmed to be a 
regression ? as we have 2 opinions here. :)

Thanks.

Regards,
Chin Luh

On 23/2/2017 7:50 AM, Samuel Gougeon wrote:
> Hello Antoine,
>
> I am answering in the thread:
>
> Le 22/02/2017 à 14:28, antoine.elias at scilab-enterprises.com a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> After some tests, it seems that Scilab 5 loads in local context "sub 
>> functions" only when you call the main function.
>
> yes, the first time that the registered function is used.
>>
>> with your sample, test1 and testa in the same test1.sci file
>> genlib -> load -> testa -> KO
>>                -> test1 -> testa -> OK
> and then, next calls
> -> testa -> OK
>
>>
>> In Scilab 6, we load "sub functions" as nested functions of the main 
>> function.
>> So they can be called in main function but after the call, they are 
>> "cleared".
>>
>> It is a regression, 
>
> Really?! I am very surprised by this assertion. Some (may be many) 
> former native Scilab .sci files have been split to work in this new 
> way -- for instance ged.sci embedded many subfunctions that have been 
> transfered in as many separated files (and moved to the TCL 
> module...). And AFAIRemember, this feature was already discussed in 
> 2015 on users@ or devs at . So, i believed, and still believe that this 
> change is /intentional/.
> By the way, this new behavior has some advantages. Without it, making 
> private functions compels to define them a) inside the calling one, 
> and b) at its beginning. This was not very smart programming.
> The only way to avoid explicitly defining them at the beginning was to 
> exec them (still at the beginning).
> I never run any benchmarks to compare timing of exec()uting an 
> external definition file at run time:
>
> function test()
>   exec("mysubfunction.sci")
> endfunction
>
> versus compiling an embedded function/endfunction as well at run time:
>
> function test()
>      function mysubfunction(..)
>          // Its code
>     endfunction
> endfunction
>
> A priori, i would say that using an external file laying on the disk 
> is slower than compiling things in RAM.
> So, imo, this change was not really expected, but it leads to a 
> smarter programming, and likely processes subfunctions in a faster way.
> So, why do you say that it is a regression ?
>
> BR
> Samuel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at lists.scilab.org
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170311/ecacdfc3/attachment.htm>