[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: firls.m, part 2
From: |
je suis |
Subject: |
Re: firls.m, part 2 |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Jun 2017 06:40:26 +0000 |
> fixing any obvious bugs (k2?)
I don't know what happened, I replaced those, but github seems strange
to me. At any rate, I managed to keep the same version. On my computer
it says now "PASSES 23 out of 23 tests".
> , checking output against examples & matlab,
I'd like to ask for another round of verifications against Matlab.
> adding tests, and maybe revising a bit to match Octave's preferred 'coding
> style' [1], should about cover it.
I tried to match everything on that page, but I (most) probably missed
a few, but it should be according the Octave's coding style. If you
find that the script works (and checks against Matlab), then I'll
submit to bugs.octave.
BTW: should it be "Octave function" or "Octave Forge package"? And last release?
Vlad
- Re: firls.m, part 2, (continued)
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Francesco Potortì, 2017/06/19
- Re: firls.m, part 2, je suis, 2017/06/20
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Mike Miller, 2017/06/20
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/20
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/20
- Re: firls.m, part 2, je suis, 2017/06/21
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/21
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/21
- Re: firls.m, part 2,
je suis <=
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/23
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/23
- Re: firls.m, part 2, je suis, 2017/06/25
- Re: firls.m, part 2, Nicholas Jankowski, 2017/06/25