Sounds reasonable to me; though I would personally be fine with
adding some small classes along the lines of what I outlined above
to support events. They could even be package-scoped if we want to
keep them out of the public API and replace later with more general
constructs used elsewhere
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Ceki Gülcü c...@qos.ch wrote:
On 10/08/2011 8:02 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
rambling scope=large unabashed-plugin=true
Thank you for posting this summary of the Apache way. Yes, it is damn
hard to track contributions, especially if one wishes to do it
2011/8/11 Arne Ploese aplo...@gmx.de:
What methods do you need?
Maybe an interface with:
public interface SimpleRealVector {
double getEntry(int i);
int getDimension();
}
will do?
No, I'd like to have *all* methods of the o.a.c.m.linear.RealVector
interface, *except* those which modify
So you not only want to observe the result, but you want a read only
RealVector.
A clean solution would be split RealVector in a base interface, which
not modifies any internal Data and a inherited interface which adds
xxxToSelf and setEnty(...). ??? I think this could lead to some
unforseeable
2011/8/11 Arne Ploese aplo...@gmx.de:
So you not only want to observe the result, but you want a read only
RealVector.
That's right. I'm sorry, my first message was not clear, especially if
you did not follow the thread on iterative solvers.
I want to observe the *solver*, and the current state
On 2011-08-11, Mark Struberg wrote:
That's great news and even underlines better what Christian already
stated: committocracy doen't really work out - not socially and not
even technically.
No argument from my side.
The code in question seems to got moved a few times, so all commit
history
Yes, that's the plan. the 'new' plexus-utils FileUtils will for example
probably be a slim shim over the commons-io counterpart and just route through.
I now grabbed the Ant SVN codebase and figured that this got imported from CVS
in 2004...
Happy to report back fixes, but I'm doing almost a
On 11/08/2011 8:13 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
I was going to say: That would put Sebb in charge of the ASF!!!, but
then I noticed that after the import of Jena Andy Seaborne appears to
be the top count committer (I know, that doesn't measure size of
commit).
Le 11/08/2011 06:14, Phil Steitz a écrit :
On 8/10/11 8:19 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
Hello,
going back to the initial conversation. It seems to me that
formalizing Iterative Algorithms in a general way is very interesting,
but not a realistic target for 3.0 (or probably even 3.1). However, I
Le 11/08/2011 10:55, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
2011/8/11 Arne Ploeseaplo...@gmx.de:
So you not only want to observe the result, but you want a read only
RealVector.
That's right. I'm sorry, my first message was not clear, especially if
you did not follow the thread on iterative solvers.
I
On 2011-08-11, Mark Struberg wrote:
I now grabbed the Ant SVN codebase and figured that this got imported
from CVS in 2004...
Most of the exec, io and compress stuff is older. I wrote the initial
version of the zip package in 2001 and Thomas Haas and Conor MacNeill
did most of the exec things
OK, this I also think would be useful. But my initial question
remains, if the object I want to protect is not a RealVector, what do
you think of my solution ?
Sébastien
PS : the problem is likely to occur when listening to other Iterative
Processes (not only linear solvers). For example, in
Well, in fact I would very much like to have immutable vectors too.
Immutability is really a way to simplify implementations. Surprisingly it
sometimes also decrease time and memory consumption, because defensive
copies littering user code can be avoided.
Luc, I have a silly question. Why do
commons-exec is actively maintained by Sigi Goeschl. So at least this is known
to be in good hands.
The plexus stuff still has @author tags. That's the reason why I learned that
you have been involved. I know this also has been discussed highly
controversial, but for such fork scenarios the
2011/8/11 Sébastien Brisard sebastien.bris...@m4x.org:
OK, this I also think would be useful. But my initial question
remains, if the object I want to protect is not a RealVector, what do
you think of my solution ?
Sébastien
If you create the read-only version by subclassing the writable
2011/8/11 sebb seb...@gmail.com:
2011/8/11 Sébastien Brisard sebastien.bris...@m4x.org:
OK, this I also think would be useful. But my initial question
remains, if the object I want to protect is not a RealVector, what do
you think of my solution ?
Sébastien
If you create the read-only
Le 11/08/2011 12:24, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
Well, in fact I would very much like to have immutable vectors too.
Immutability is really a way to simplify implementations. Surprisingly it
sometimes also decrease time and memory consumption, because defensive
copies littering user code can be
Hello Sébastien.
Well, in fact I would very much like to have immutable vectors too.
Immutability is really a way to simplify implementations. Surprisingly it
sometimes also decrease time and memory consumption, because defensive
copies littering user code can be avoided.
Luc, I have
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project commons-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This
Le 11/08/2011 13:10, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
2011/8/11 sebbseb...@gmail.com:
2011/8/11 Sébastien Brisardsebastien.bris...@m4x.org:
OK, this I also think would be useful. But my initial question
remains, if the object I want to protect is not a RealVector, what do
you think of my solution ?
You can also have a common interface without modification methods, and two
implementations, an immutable one and a mutable one (I think this is how
Scala containers are designed).
Luc
That is I suppose the cleanest approach, but within the solver's loop,
I need the current solution to be
In the SVD class I notice:
FastMath.max(m, n)
all over the place. Since these values are known when the constructor is
called and are final, would anyone object to making the result a private
instance variable?
I see only 2 places: lines 557 and 569.
[In one of them it is
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 01:16:32PM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Le 11/08/2011 12:24, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
Well, in fact I would very much like to have immutable vectors too.
Immutability is really a way to simplify implementations. Surprisingly it
sometimes also decrease time and
Le 01/08/2011 16:49, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
All other archives are read correctly by ZipArchiveInputStream, there is
a problem with reading the size of the big entry inside the archive
created by jar, but this clearly is a bug in Java7 and I'm going to
report it against OpenJDK[1] (and may
On 11 August 2011 10:21, Ceki Gülcü c...@qos.ch wrote:
On 11/08/2011 8:13 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
I was going to say: That would put Sebb in charge of the ASF!!!, but
then I noticed that after the import of Jena Andy Seaborne appears to
be the top count committer (I know, that doesn't
On 2011-08-11, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 01/08/2011 16:49, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
All other archives are read correctly by ZipArchiveInputStream, there is
a problem with reading the size of the big entry inside the archive
created by jar, but this clearly is a bug in Java7 and I'm going to
I agree with sebb. I prefer an organization where everyone gets one
vote. This is obviously not the only way an organization can run, but
I like neither having a diminished or overwhelming power with my vote.
The best part of having only +1 is that you can't use your merit to
strong-arm decisions
On 2011-08-11, Mark Struberg wrote:
commons-exec is actively maintained by Sigi Goeschl. So at least this
is known to be in good hands.
I didn't mean to imply it wasn't - or any of the other code that was
forked wasn't properly maintained.
It's currently in the sandbox, so every ASF
Hi,
currently I've set the Zip64SupportTest to @Ignore because - even if you
dont have the integration test archives around - it simply takes too
long to run every time.
Using the pretty decent notebook $work has given to me the whole test
takes 45 minutes of heavy I/O load and the machine is
On 11 August 2011 15:44, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
currently I've set the Zip64SupportTest to @Ignore because - even if you
dont have the integration test archives around - it simply takes too
long to run every time.
Using the pretty decent notebook $work has given to me
A common pattern is to introduce an own 'run-its' profile which configures
surefire to pickup those tests.
It's just not good to have tests which in summary takes longer than 3 minutes
to run. This usually leads to developers using -Dmaven.test.skip=true which is
kind of counter productive...
On 2011-08-11, Mark Struberg wrote:
A common pattern is to introduce an own 'run-its' profile which
configures surefire to pickup those tests.
How? 8-)
Do I put the test into a separate directory and tell surefire inside the
profile to look into that other dir?
It's just not good to have
On 2011-08-11, sebb wrote:
Not tried this, but looks to be what you want:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1689242/conditionally-ignoring-tests-in-junit-4
I know Assume, even use it inside the test to skip all tests that
require the interop archives when those files are not present.
For
On 11 August 2011 16:32, Stefan Bodewig bode...@apache.org wrote:
On 2011-08-11, sebb wrote:
Not tried this, but looks to be what you want:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1689242/conditionally-ignoring-tests-in-junit-4
I know Assume, even use it inside the test to skip all tests that
usually the maven-surefire-plugin will only pickup classes with the pattern
*Test.java.
You can rename the longrunning Tests to *IT.java and configure the
surefireplugin to additionally pickup those test classes only in the run-its
profile.
configuration
includes
On 11.08.11 00:00, sebb wrote:
Only missing item is a logo for the component.
Well, then, I hereby declare the contest open. Your contributions are
welcome. :-)
Bye, Thomas.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Hi folks,
this special generics case is beyond my skills. Please see
org.apache.jcs.utils.struct.DoubleLinkedList. The DoubleLinkedListNode
needs to be generified. However I was not able to find a solution that
makes the compiler happy.
Any suggestions how to solve this?
Bye, Thomas.
Am Donnerstag, den 11.08.2011, 10:55 +0200 schrieb Sébastien Brisard:
2011/8/11 Arne Ploese aplo...@gmx.de:
So you not only want to observe the result, but you want a read only
RealVector.
That's right. I'm sorry, my first message was not clear, especially if
you did not follow the
Hi,
As those of you who've been following the CODEC-125 ticket will know, with
Greg's help I've got a port of the beider morse phonetic
matching (bmpm) algorithm in as a string encoder. As far as I can tell, it's
ready for people to use and abuse. It ideally needs more test-case words,
but to the
Le 11/08/2011 13:29, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
You can also have a common interface without modification methods, and two
implementations, an immutable one and a mutable one (I think this is how
Scala containers are designed).
Luc
That is I suppose the cleanest approach, but within the
On 11 August 2011 19:38, Matthew Pocock turingatemyhams...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
As those of you who've been following the CODEC-125 ticket will know, with
Greg's help I've got a port of the beider morse phonetic
matching (bmpm) algorithm in as a string encoder. As far as I can tell, it's
Hi Sebb,
The reason I raised the issue was that the API seems to be currently
in a state of flux.
The BMPM code has not appeared in a previous release. It is a discrete
addition that doesn't alter any existing code, and as far as I know,
currently no 3rd party code relies upon it. Right now
Hello All!
Topic 1: Housekeeping: package name and POM.
The next codec release out of trunk will be major release labeled 2.0,
the current release is 1.5.
In trunk, I've removed deprecated methods and the project now requires
Java 5. This means 2.0 will not be a drop-in binary compatible
On 8/11/11 4:22 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hello Sébastien.
Well, in fact I would very much like to have immutable vectors too.
Immutability is really a way to simplify implementations. Surprisingly it
sometimes also decrease time and memory consumption, because defensive
copies littering
On 11 August 2011 20:56, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All!
Topic 1: Housekeeping: package name and POM.
The next codec release out of trunk will be major release labeled 2.0,
the current release is 1.5.
In trunk, I've removed deprecated methods and the project now
On 11 August 2011 20:55, Matthew Pocock turingatemyhams...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sebb,
The reason I raised the issue was that the API seems to be currently
in a state of flux.
The BMPM code has not appeared in a previous release. It is a discrete
addition that doesn't alter any existing
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 August 2011 20:56, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All!
Topic 1: Housekeeping: package name and POM.
The next codec release out of trunk will be major release labeled 2.0,
the current release is 1.5.
In
Hello,
I have a proposal for a numerical derivatives framework for Commons
Math. I'd like to add the ability to take any UnivariateRealFunction
and produce another function that represents it's derivative for an
arbitrary order. Basically, I'm saying add a factory-like interface
that looks
Hi All:
The 2.0 to 3.0 Clirr report here:
https://commons.apache.org/lang/lang2-lang3-clirr-report.html
lists that all classes added are in the .lang. package instead of the
.lang3. package.
Cheers,
Gary
http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
http://garygregory.com/
At least three with some code I checked in last night. The point is that
there is no reason to replicate the same thing over and over again.
-Greg
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Gilles Sadowski
gil...@harfang.homelinux.org wrote:
In the SVD class I notice:
FastMath.max(m, n)
Le 11/08/2011 23:27, Fran Lattanzio a écrit :
Hello,
Hi Fran,
I have a proposal for a numerical derivatives framework for Commons
Math. I'd like to add the ability to take any UnivariateRealFunction
and produce another function that represents it's derivative for an
arbitrary order.
I like the idea of adding this feature. What about an abstract class
that implements DifferentiableMultivariateRealFunction and provides the
method for partialDerivative (). People could then override the
partialDerivative method if they have an analytic derivative.
Here's some code that I'm
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 August 2011 20:56, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All!
Topic 1: Housekeeping: package name and POM.
The next codec release out of trunk will be major release labeled 2.0,
the current release is 1.5.
In
I'd be quite interested in seeing Numerical Derivatives in CM. There are some
interesting ideas about Numerical Differentiation here:
http://www.holoborodko.com/pavel/numerical-methods/
Bruce
On Aug 11, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Patrick Meyer wrote:
I like the idea of adding this feature. What
Modify manually to fix :)
I don't think we'll need to make a new one, that shows 2.6-3.0 and
after that will be generated.
Hen
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All:
The 2.0 to 3.0 Clirr report here:
Hi,
it's clear I think that there is no really fool-proof solution, but
that's OK I think. The idea would be to avoid accidental modifications
which could be catastrophic. But nothing could prevent an evil
programmer to do its evil job. I like what was earlier pointed out:
Javadoc should be very
On 2011-08-11, Mark Struberg wrote:
usually the maven-surefire-plugin will only pickup classes with the pattern
*Test.java.
You can rename the longrunning Tests to *IT.java and configure the
surefireplugin to additionally pickup those test classes only in the
run-its profile.
On 8/11/11 8:41 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
Hi,
it's clear I think that there is no really fool-proof solution, but
that's OK I think. The idea would be to avoid accidental modifications
which could be catastrophic. But nothing could prevent an evil
programmer to do its evil job. I like what
As Patrick suggested, this approach should really be extended to
multivariate functions. To cite but one example, I recently attended a
conf where Pr. Prevost (Princeton) talked about non-linear finite
elements calcs. The long standing approach had always been to
implement the analytical
59 matches
Mail list logo
