[Scilab-users] Replacing predef() with an actual varprot(): a top-5 priority for Scilab 6.1 <= At last, protecting user variables one by one

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Samuel GOUGEON Samuel GOUGEON
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Scilab-users] Replacing predef() with an actual varprot(): a top-5 priority for Scilab 6.1 <= At last, protecting user variables one by one

Hello,

Scilab 6.0 is released. With respect to previous major releases, the storage and management of variables have been completely changed. This was one of the major purposes for this release.

Yet, after 30 years of development of this high level software, we are still unable to protect any user variable against clearing, and there are no news on this side. There are many oitlying developments, whereas this central feature is still unavailable. The pseudo function predef() is still here, alone, never ever actually usable.

Indeed, predef() is unable to protect variables one by one, at any moment after the session startup. As its name states it, predef() has been designed exclusively to protect predefined variables %i, %pi, etc during the startup process. It is a startup internal, and we could wonder why it has been documented.

One of the most disturbing and buggy consequences of this missing feature is that it is still  impossible to protect a library that has been loaded during the session, i.e. not autoloaded at startup. Any clear instruction -- so loved by many former Matlabers in their scripts -- kills all such libraries.

The need for a true customizable function to protect/unprotect variables was reported as soon as 2004 -- and likely even before --, so 13 years ago. For the only bugzilla reports, please see for instance:

http://bugzilla.scilab.org/686
http://bugzilla.scilab.org/8634
http://bugzilla.scilab.org/10988

Scilab has still some central weaknesses like this one.
IMO, implementing varprot() should be a top priority.

Don't you need this feature as well?

Best regards

Samuel Gougeon


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
amonmayr amonmayr
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Replacing predef() with an actual varprot(): a top-5 priority for Scilab 6.1?==?utf-8?q? <= At last, protecting user variables one by one

Le Jeudi, Juin 08, 2017 19:51 CEST, Samuel Gougeon <[hidden email]> a écrit:
 

> Hello,
>
> Scilab 6.0 is released. With respect to previous major releases, the
> storage and management of variables have been completely changed. This
> was one of the major purposes for this release.
>
> Yet, after 30 years of development of this high level software, we are
> still unable to protect any user variable against clearing, and there
> are no news on this side. There are many oitlying developments, whereas
> this central feature is still unavailable. The pseudo function predef()
> is still here, alone, never ever actually usable.
>
> Indeed, predef() is unable to protect variables one by one, at any
> moment after the session startup. As its name states it, predef() has
> been designed exclusively to protect *predef*ined variables %i, %pi, etc
> during the startup process. It is a startup *internal*, and we could
> wonder why it has been documented.
>
> One of the most disturbing and buggy consequences of this missing
> feature is that it is still  impossible to protect a library that has
> been loaded during the session, i.e. not autoloaded at startup. Any
> /clear/ instruction -- so loved by many former Matlabers in their
> scripts -- kills all such libraries.
>
> The need for a true customizable function to protect/unprotect variables
> was reported as soon as 2004 -- and likely even before --, so 13 years
> ago. For the only bugzilla reports, please see for instance:
>
> http://bugzilla.scilab.org/686
> http://bugzilla.scilab.org/8634
> http://bugzilla.scilab.org/10988
>
> Scilab has still some central weaknesses like this one.
> IMO, implementing varprot() should be a top priority.
>
> Don't you need this feature as well?

Oh, yes I do, like many of my colleagues!

Antoine

>
> Best regards
>
> Samuel Gougeon
>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users