Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm currently using MatLab 6.5 (it's a 2004 version), because the custom code files I need aren't compatible with newer versions.
I'm wondering what are the necessary steps to update those files.
Thanks very much to everyone reading!
Ideally, those files have associated unit tests, so you could have an indication on whether each of them runs correctly or not. Probably not your case.
If you can, try having both Matlab versions on your machine, then have a copy of the file sets to modify and another copy just to inspect and run in the old version for reference.
If changes are expected to be made on a per file basis, then start by opening each file and checking warnings. As good practice, never leave warning in .m files, and suppress those that you'll be accepting nominally. I.e. put %#ok<NASGU> or other warning code but not simply %#ok. Most upgrade related issues are indicated by warnings. You can check the current folder for such problems with mlintrpt (see here)
Then, there is a compatibility tool codeCompatibilityReport, simply typing this will explore folders in your current workspace, and you might just use that if you expect changes in general to be minor or not to be needed for every file.
Now, for simple files, these should be everything you need, I"d expect that after some debugging and relearning, you'd have a much smoother experience with a recent version of Matlab than with a 10+ years old version. For shorter-term updates, I would recommend to avoid switching versions mid-project.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
It seems this has not been asked before - and maybe I'm too dumb to figure it out myself. I am trying to download a specific MatLab package and being decently new to MatLab - I have no idea how to get it to work. There is no exe file or anything that denotes usefulness in "downloading" it into my MatLab software. The package in question can be found [here]. It is called MetSign - open-source made by UL and I would like to check it out. Thank you for any help.
On the link you provide, at the bottom there's a link saying "download". Click that, and it will take you to SourceForge, a download website for open source software. Wait for a few seconds, and download of a .zip file will start. Wait for the download to complete, and save the .zip file somewhere on your computer. Unzip the file to somewhere on your computer. Inside you'll find a bunch of .m files. These are MATLAB code files. Within MATLAB, add the folder containing the downloaded code to your MATLAB path using the command addpath. Now run the code. I can't help you much with that step, as I have no idea what the code does, but on the original download page there are also links to some academic papers describing the code - I imagine these will give you some hints about how to run it.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I know this is probably a super silly question, but how do I install on my pc open source programs that I find here on github.
By installing I mean directly from the source code, and not by going on some external website and downloading the file from there.
I know I'm a noob, just go easy on me please
Github page of the program will generally show README file, and it would contain instructions on how to install this program. Sometimes you can find the instructions in wiki pages for this project.
There is no one general way to install something from github, it really depends on the software you are looking at.
Quite often, especially if it is a big project and is written in low level language, the main installation step is entering commands
./configure
make
make install
in your terminal, but this is only one of the different installation procedures.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am interested to hear how secure the source code is when compiled with MATLAB Compiler as of 2014? I read two threads on the subject from 2011 that states that there are security flaws.
In this thread from 2011 it is stated that the names of the source files are exposed to the users
http://www.mathworks.fr/matlabcentral/newsreader/view_thread/299373
In this thread from 2011 it is stated that m-files sometimes are exposed at obscure locations in the host system.
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/newsreader/view_thread/310932
Do anyone know if these flaws have been addressed?
All applications produced by the MATLAB Compiler (and related toolboxes) include an embedded CTF archive. This archive is embedded in the generated component (standalone EXE, shared DLL, Java packes, .NET assemblies, etc..) along with a target-specific boilerplate code to expose it as a binary component of the expected format.
The CTF archive contains all the MATLAB source and data of the project files in an encrypted form (AES encryption). The archive is extracted when the application runs for the first time (to a configurable cache location), files are then decrypted and executed in the context of the MCR runtime. So even though there will be a bunch of visible M-files inside the cache directory, they all in an encrypted form (no clear text code is ever written to disk).
You can read more about this in the documentation.
The way I see it, there is no glaring flaw here, and there never was... I don't think the names of the source files is something one worries about exposing!
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Essentially, I have an interesting Perl script that I want to put on Github / other places that I want to be re-distributable but I do not want anyone compiling it and then redistributing it (yes I know the source would be included with certain licenses - but I don't want it to ever be compiled at all).
Those who can figure out how to use CPAN, etc, to set it up - I want them to be able to use it and redistribute it in source format but is there a way of restricting the compilation and then redistribution. I only want to allow users to redistribute in source.
Your requirements are at odds with each other. The first step of running a Perl 5 program is compiling. Your best bet is the GPLv3, it requires anyone who distributes a compiled version to also provide a method to retrieve the source.
Most of the methods of making a binary out of a Perl 5 script (which I think you are confusing with compiling) aren't actually compiling. They are packaging. The source is still present in the binary and is compiled at run-time by an included copy of the perl binary.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
From the top, "source control" seems like a bad way to describe CA Harvest; it's a deployment control system, and it's actually pretty good at just deploying code. I've found it to be lacking when doing source control tasks, though.
If you've used Harvest;
what did it do right?
what couldn't it do?
what did it do with a workaround so hackish it took 3x longer than you'd expect?
(Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) Harvest seems awesome for deployment control, enforcing steps along a deployment lifecycle, and getting a chain of approval for deployments to production. That said, it's missing on the developer-friendly side.
It seems like I need to use the Workareas; they let me put all the code on my local machine, so I can do development.
With Workareas, I can only synchronize from the repository, but not get a report of what just sync'ed in; I don't know what changed, or who changed it, or why.
To add comments to checkins using Workareas, you have to manually enable the functionality in the preferences, which is a huge red flag to me.
I can't seem to figure out how to find out what changed since a specific time; what changed since Friday at 5 PM, for example?
There aren't any atomic commits; I can't commit files as a group, then roll the group back later if something goes wrong. I can do it as a package, but that's heavyweight; a package should be able to contain hundreds of atomic commits/groups.
And worst of all, it's entirely unsupported by Stack Overflow and/or any other question-and-answer site I can find. If I can't figure it out... I'm shooting blind.
We're currently migrating away from Harvest.
Configuration management and code deployment. We have a pretty good process flow going.
Branching and merging. Horrible SCM tool really.
?