Re: firls.m, part 2

[Mike Miller]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:43:36 -0400, Nicholas Jankowski wrote:
> Well, a number of people are working on a number of their own
> projects, it appears that you were point person on this one.

Yeah, very often the number of people interested in a function enough to
work on fixing it or improving it is between zero and one.

> If there actually is a deficiency in expint, and your
> version improves it I think fixing the main one would be preferable to
> just having your fix as a subfunction to firls.

Absolutely. If there is a problem with Octave's expint for certain types
of inputs, please consider fixing that there instead of introducing a
workaround function.

> I notice there are still no built-in tests at the end of the current
> version.  I'd recommend adding a bunch of those for basic input/output
> form checking as well as a few (simple if possible) expected numerical
> outputs. I think one of my past emails may have included some
> examples.

Built-in tests are a must, firls.m has none and any changes must include
some tests to validate that it's working as expected.

> There is no single maintainer for the specfun package,
> which contains expint, but maybe he has suggestions there.

The expint function used to be in the specfun package, it is now part of
Octave.

-- 
mike