sgolayfilt no longer support SINGLE
in [Matlab]
|
From: dpb on 11 Jun 2010 09:35 Steve Eddins wrote: > On 6/11/2010 8:31 AM, dpb wrote: .... >> I'd say that mission statement demonstrates completely that indeed TMW >> _HAS_ fallen trap to the "dynamic of large complex systems". How else >> could one generate such claptrap other than by committee? :) >> >> -- > > Claptrap? What a cynical outlook. I've worked at MathWorks for 16 years. > The mission accurately reflected our beliefs back then when we had just > 200 employees, and it accurately reflects our beliefs now. .... I guess so...such words at that level remind me of nothing but "management bingo" and/or computer-generated phrases. A recasting of the ideas in somewhat more modest terms I could stomach...that wording seems "over the top". Then again, I've been thru over 40 years of employment from large to small to self and seen innumerable iterations of dogma which has undoubtedly had its cumulative effects... --
From: Steve Eddins on 11 Jun 2010 09:57 On 6/11/2010 9:35 AM, dpb wrote: > Steve Eddins wrote: >> On 6/11/2010 8:31 AM, dpb wrote: > ... > >>> I'd say that mission statement demonstrates completely that indeed TMW >>> _HAS_ fallen trap to the "dynamic of large complex systems". How else >>> could one generate such claptrap other than by committee? :) >>> >>> -- >> >> Claptrap? What a cynical outlook. I've worked at MathWorks for 16 >> years. The mission accurately reflected our beliefs back then when we >> had just 200 employees, and it accurately reflects our beliefs now. > ... > > I guess so...such words at that level remind me of nothing but > "management bingo" and/or computer-generated phrases. > > A recasting of the ideas in somewhat more modest terms I could > stomach...that wording seems "over the top". > > Then again, I've been thru over 40 years of employment from large to > small to self and seen innumerable iterations of dogma which has > undoubtedly had its cumulative effects... I understand your reaction. I've also been skeptical of some corporate mission statements. But I can connect every phrase of the technology, business, human, and social mission statements to concrete and long-lasting attitudes, activities, and practices in place at MathWorks. The joy and reward of striving to achieve these challenging ideals is what keeps me coming to work. --- Steve Eddins http://blogs.mathworks.com/steve/
From: Steven Lord on 11 Jun 2010 10:17 "Joaquim Luis" <jluis@--ualg--.pt> wrote in message news:hurt6g$eu3$1(a)fred.mathworks.com... > Honglei Chen <Honglei.Chen(a)mathworks.com> wrote in message > <hq2pim$599$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>... >> Hi Bruno, >> >> We take backwards compatibility very seriously. > > You do??? > So may I ask, where is the Maltab compiler right now? Right here. http://www.mathworks.com/products/compiler/ If you intended to ask "Why doesn't MATLAB Compiler generate C or C++ code that we can modify like previous versions did?" there are a number of reasons that I don't want to get into (and I'm not sure I am allowed to get into.) If you want to get technical, EACH AND EVERY single enhancement we make to our products and ALMOST EVERY single bug fix we make are incompatibilities. If we never wanted to introduce any incompatibilties, we could say "Okay, our products are done", much like Donald Knuth has requested that TeX and METAFONT remain unchanged after his (hopefully far in the future) death: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeX But I'd like to think that our users would prefer that we try to make our products better and fix bugs and introduce new features they request. [Since I _know_ you're going to ask how the newer versions of MATLAB Compiler are better than the older versions: the newer versions can, among other things, compile MATLAB classes -- the older versions could not do so. I'm almost certain that was THE #1 requested feature for the Compiler (by a LARGE margin) before we introduced that capability in MATLAB Compiler 4.0.] -- Steve Lord slord(a)mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab (CSSM) FAQ: http://matlabwiki.mathworks.com/MATLAB_FAQ To contact Technical Support use the Contact Us link on http://www.mathworks.com
From: Jan Simon on 11 Jun 2010 10:54 Dear Honglei! > We take backwards compatibility very seriously. I have the impression, that TMW takes backward(s?) compatibility seriously -- without "very". Most of all I miss a list of changes in the functions. E.g. if some asks in the newgroup for the FIND command and uses Matlab 2006b, I cannot find a message in my 2009a doc of FIND, when the 'first'/'last' option has been added. I cannot find the doc of 2006b in the net, therefore I have to search in all List-Of-Changes pages from 2007a to 2009a, if I want to find the version including the enhanced FIND. The new list of open/solved bugs is a very good step in the right direction. A tiny history including new/changed/lost features and open/solved bugs in each M-file would be more user-friendly. "Very" serious backward(s?) compatibilty demands for a full documentation of changes reachable by users. Nevertheless, it is easier to port Matlab source from Matlab 4.2c to 2010a than a function calling the API of Windows 3.1 to Windows 7. Another example: Try to port source code from K&R-C to C89 to C90 to C95 to C99. An exception is the Mex-API, which has been subject to strange changes in the past (mxCreateScalarDouble -> mxCreateDoubleScalar ?!), but since Matlab 6.5 this API is very stable also. I think, TMW can be proud of the reached status of backward compatibility, and could be encouraged to improve it until the degree of perfection is reached to become the "ultimate computing environment" and claim to have an "outstanding service to our customers". Kind regards, Jan
From: sscnekro on 11 Jun 2010 11:38
> Good night also to you, sleep well, keeping a part of the TMW mission in your heart: "Our goal is to change the world (...)" Not kidding, see > http://www.mathworks.com/company/aboutus/mission_values/mission.html Hey everybody, maybe I was misunderstood in my view of the TMW mission. Pls let me say *I believe* that the piece of text *really* mirrors what TMW staff believes and it should be taken seriously. Also, I have no problem with believing that "software developers and engineers at TMW (...) are trying to get the product quality and usefulness up to edge of own possibilities" and something similar could be said on all individual employees. But: How does this organization really work, in what way does it communicates with customers, and more? For goods and services providers there is nothing to compare a continuous lively dialog. Is there any such dialog? If one reads the above posts, there are ML users who raise certain issues. Do the TMW guys seem to appreciate the legimitate feedback? A product or service is good if and only if it is good for customers. Is ML good? As for me I can say that I really like ML. But one person does not make the statistically relevant sample to judge that question. So, who knows? And that is what I was talking about - keeping in touch with ***a broad base of ML users*** of different types. But to live up this dialog, I sent link to this thread to the following e-mail: * jlittle(a)mathworks.com * There came no failure delivery report so far. Maybe you know that it is principally possible to contact Stephen Wolfram. http://www.stephenwolfram.com/ Let's see what it gives :OP |