Re: [OctDev] no more combinatorics and physical-constants package

[c. <car...@gm...>]

On 17 Oct 2012, at 13:01, Carnë Draug wrote:

>> Carnë,
>> 
>> I do agree with the move of physical_constant into the miscellaneous package
>> as it reduces the total number of packages.
>> Was it really necessary, though, to change the names of all the constants?
>> This breaks all existing code using "physical_constant" (and I have a lot of that around),
>> would you mind if check-in a patch to allow using both the new and the old format for the names?
>> It would also have been nice if this change was mentioned somewhere, for example in the "news".
> 
> Sorry, I forgot to mention this on the file. The reason for the name
> change was that the previous code actually had a bug and when there
> was more than one constant (for different temperature or pressure
> conditions), only the last on the list would be used. If you commit a
> change, do it on the python script that generates the whole function
> file.
> 
> Carnë

OK, I'll try to do so.
c.