gnu-octave / gnu-octave/symbolic
Decision: Run py* functions in Symbolic's own namespace
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
pythonic
- Dominant language
- MATLAB
- Stars
- 178
- Forks
- 37
- Avg merge
- 25m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Probably very low priority for now, put it here just for the sake of completeness.
We need to decide when/if to run every py* function in a different namespace to avoid any conflict with any user defined symbols/variables... Also, ofcourse, the name of the namespace..
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by inventorying the py* functions and reviewing how they currently resolve user-defined symbols. Compare the namespace options and identify affected callers or tests, then document a decision on whether a separate namespace is needed, including its name and expected behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- matlab, python
- Domain
- backend-api-design
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100