Thu 13 Aug 2015 08:42:12 PM UTC, original submission:
I am reporting below some comments made by Francesco Potortì in the context of Bug#794780, filed against the Debian pacakge octave-image. There are apparently incosistencies in the way arguments are named in functions cp2tform, maketform, tformfwd, and tforminv.
I am transcribing almost verbatim what Francesco wrote. I did not check carefully his claims. Please, feel free to close this bug report if you think the comments are not relevant.
Rafael Laboissière
=================================================
From: Francesco Potortì
Date: 2015-08-13
As you can read, the two reference systems are called here "real world" and "apparent".
Here no explicit name is given to the two reference systems, but from the formal arguments it is apparent that they are intended as "in" and "out".
Here the two reference systems are just anonymous, so no semantic is even suggested, and they are called "one" and "the other".
So we have three different naming conventions for three functions which are strictly related. Since maketform is the basis function, and the one that choses the naming of the fields in the Tform, probebaly the "in" and "out" convention should be used in all description strings.
Now that I notice it, the tforminv function has the same exact description as the tformfwd function, which makes no sense. The typos are the same, and besides it should at least mention that while the tformfwd uses the "forward_fcn" matrix inside the Tform, tforminv uses the "inverse_fcn" matrix in the Tform.
|