[Scilab-Dev] Are genlib() changes intentional? Documenting them makes them official

[Antoine ELIAS]

Hello Samuel,
1. It's intentional, when a function is private, it must stay private.
2. Need time to read threads and understand the problem.
3.It is a bug ! Someone forgot to read documentation before coding ! ( 
probably me ^^ )

Antoine

Le 14/01/2019 à 23:58, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :

> Hello devs,
>
> After having done it for lib() (already in a somewhat awkward way), i 
> would like to update the documentation for libraries and genlib() 
> pages for Scilab 6, as fairly requested there 
> <http://bugzilla.scilab.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14098>.
> However, there is no indication whether observable changes are 
> intentional or should be considered as bugs.
> Now, documenting things make them official. Therefore, the status of 
> changes should be made clearer by their authors.
>
>  1. In a .sci file, functions that are defined after the main one are
>     now private, no longer registered in the library.
>     There were some discussions about this new feature, early after
>     the first Scilab 6.0.0-alpha and beta releases.
>     I think that we can consider this point as a new great official
>     feature now.
>
>  2. genlib() no longer allows to build a library including some
>     symbols other than functions.
>     This change could be a consequence of the first chaneg presented
>     here-above.
>     A bugzilla report could be posted about this topic, that was
>     somewhat presented in this thread
>     <http://mailinglists.scilab.org/Scilab-users-Clone-a-function-continued-tp4037723p4037728.html>.
>     This point is problematic for some toolboxes.
>     IMO, the problem is that there is no workaround.
>     One smart way to do the same maybe in an even smarter way would be
>     to be able to protect variables one by one.
>     Then, doing so would be possible in the .start file of a module.
>     Indeed, this genlib feature was interesting mainly -- or even only
>     ? -- as a workaround of the unability to protect variables.
>     Now, when will it be possible to protect variables on the fly in
>     the session with Scilab 6?...
>
>  3. genlib() is no longer able to exclude any *.sci files of the
>     current directory to not be compiled. This is reported there
>     <http://bugzilla.scilab.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15919>. To me, if this
>     change is intentional, it is debatable...
>
> Looking forward to reading you
>
> Samuel
>
> PS: IMO it would be better to document as many Scilab 5 => Scilab 6.0 
> changes as possible *before* Scilab 6.1.0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190115/31bc2e3c/attachment.htm>