[Scilab-users] [Scilab-Dev] algebra conventions with integer types to be discussed

[antoine monmayrant]

Le 19/09/2018 à 13:04, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
> Le 19/09/2018 à 11:10, Stéphane Mottelet a écrit :
>> Le 19/09/2018 à 11:01, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
>>> Le 18/09/2018 à 19:26, philippe a écrit :
>>>> Le 17/09/2018 à 19:03, Stéphane Mottelet a écrit :
>>>>> Do I have to conclude that the implementation is currently so 
>>>>> incoherent
>>>>> that *nobody* uses integer types in Scilab (other than Scilab code
>>>>> itself) ?
>>>> it's a new feature,
>>>
>>> It would not be a new feature, but a change. This means that for 30 
>>> years that Scilab
>>> and its int8 uint8 int16 uint16 int32 uint32 datatypes exist, the 
>>> current algebra is used,
>>> and is used in a consistent way, even if in some aspects we may deem 
>>> that this way
>>> is too rough. At least, it is predictable, and manageable.
>>> And so, changing the current algebra would break all codes 
>>> implemented with encoded
>>> integers for 30 years.
>> The aim of my first message was a try to clarify this point. Where 
>> are this codes ?  In scilab itself, in user codes ? To me, user codes 
>> having been untouched since 10 years are not used any more...
>
> I think that this position underestimates a lot users wish for 
> stability and reproducibility.
> In a lab, in a design office, or even in the text book for a lesson in 
> maths or computing,
> if it is not possible to get the same results when changing the Scilab 
> version you use,
> then many users/authors will keep using the scilab version with which 
> the code/book has
> been implemented/written. It does not prevent installing later versions.
>
> Even 10 years: It is the "official" lifetime of the whole Scilab 5 
> family. If we fairly assume that
> the community have grown a lot with Scilab 5, it represents likely 
> almost all the existing codes.
> And the Scilab 5.5.2 will be still used for (10 ?) years. Killing the 
> ATOMS server for 5.5.2
> won't remove Scilab 5.5.2 where it is installed for existing codes, 
> and won't provide time
> to authors to update their existing ressources.
I second that!
I started using scilab with version 2.6 and no later than this year, I 
had to rerun a bunch of scripts dating back from 2004/2005 so most 
probably created using scilab 3.x.
Some of them ran without any modification and some others required minor 
updates to give exactly the same old result (most changes being in the 
cosmetic of the graphics, not on the core results of the simulation).
Last week, I gave to one of my colleagues a code I wrote in 2008, so 
exactly 10 years ago.
So reusing a 10-years-old code that have not been used during a decade 
is quite common for us ...

Cheers,

Antoine
>
> About Scilab 6.0 itself:
> The 
> "[^a-zA-Z0-9_](int8|uint8|int16|uint16|int32|uint32|int64|uint64)[^a-zA-Z0-9_]" 
> pattern
> gets 3876 hits in 293 *.sci *.sce and *.tst files.
> Not counting the *.xml ones, nor the hardcoded *.c *.cpp *.java ones 
> in which the algebra
> would have to be overhauled and updated as well.
>
> Samuel
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.scilab.org
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>