[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SANDBOX-404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13226859#comment-13226859
]
Simone Tripodi commented on SANDBOX-404:
----------------------------------------
{quote}
Now, secondary issue: while looking for a solution I also noticed that
{{SpanningTree}} did not have a generic type for the type of weight operations
(i.e. the variable in {{MutableSpanningTree}} had explicit type {{Monoid<W>}}).
So as a first attempt to fix the error I added {{WO}} as a generic type in
{{SpanningTree}} and modified all the classes using it.
{quote}
It is not an issue, it is not broken in my branch (at least).
Why should it matter which type of Monoid the spanning trees are using, at APIs
level? They don't add any value to execute algorithms.
If you can take a look at the experimental branch, I simplified a lot also the
chain builders signatures, getting rid of useless generic types.
For what I've experienced, the only types that really matter are Vertices
{{V}}, Edges {{E}} and Weights {{W}} (and {{Graph}} and its specializations)
> Simplify weight model
> ---------------------
>
> Key: SANDBOX-404
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SANDBOX-404
> Project: Commons Sandbox
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Graph
> Reporter: Simone Tripodi
> Attachments: SANDBOX-404.patch,
> SANDBOX-404_FromMonoidToAddition.patch,
> SANDBOX-404_gettingRidOfOrderedMonoid.patch
>
>
> As discussed on {{dev@}}, {{Zero}}, {{Semigroup}} and {{Monoid}} can be
> merged directly in one single interface
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
