Re: [Gretl-users] Error message with SVAR
Am 17.02.2018 um 20:49 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018, Sven Schreiber wrote:
> I'd actually go so far as to say that saving the functions to
a
> session file in the first place is already a mistake.
> It has been explained (to me and others) that the session concept
is a
> GUI thing. I don't see why contributed functions need to be saved in
> there.
Well, maybe you're right, but here's the sort of thing you
may be
missing. Suppose I save an SVAR result "as an icon" then save my
session. I (or perhaps someone else) later opens the saved session file,
and double-clicks on the icon. This should result in a call to the SVAR
bundle-printer function.
Hm, I see.
One thing is clear: _if_ we're going to save loaded functions in
the
session file, we have to mark the ones that belong to specific packages
as owned by those packages so we don't get false-positive conflicts.
Right. That sounded very complicated, but maybe it's not, given that in
functions.xml (inside the session file) the functions already appear in
context with their owning packages.
I'm wondering about different package versions, though. Say I have an
old session file with embedded package foo.gfn version 0.1. In the
meantime the package is at version 2.5. If I load the session and then
do 'include foo.gfn', what is supposed to happen? Always load the latest
available package version and replace the older function versions? (In
memory I mean, not in the session file.) That would mean to tell users
not to do 'include' if they want to rely on the function versions
embedded in the session file.
Or a switch could be added to 'include' that clarifies this. Like
--keep-old or something.
cheers,
sven