Brent Worden wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 3:06 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [math] proposed ordering for task list, scope of initial
release


Al Chou wrote:


Finally, having used the Pietschmann root finder framework, I

think it needs


some modification to make it more user-friendly. As a lay

user, I would have


been much happier dealing with Brent W.'s interface than Herr

Pietschmann's,


which was kind of cumbersome. I think, though, with a little

slimming down, it


would be quite workable.

I'm interested in hearung a few more details: what makes the framework cumbersome? Admittedly I didn't have time yet to look at Brent's framework.

J.Pietschmann



For clarification, I never meant for the bisection method to be the end-all
for root finding. I just needed something to facilitate the distribution
implementations.

Works like a champ ;-) I am having fun with these. I am thinking about publishing some critical value tables with the apache liscense. he he.


I would prefer using J's object approach to the static
method any day, if for no reason then because of the inflexibility of static
methods.  They can't be overriden, they can't hold on to any state (a nice
feature in J's work), they can't be subclassed, ..

This is an important point. Despite my recent advocacy for a small set of static "util" methods, I strongly agree that we should never implement complex algorithms in static methods and we should in general avoid statics for the reasons that you give above.
.

That being said, any design can be approved on (sorry J, even yours), but the flavor of the object approach is, IMO, more agreeable than the static method approach. It also is inline with the direction most of the library is beginning to take; complex algorithms encapsulated in strategy type objects which are interchangeable through a common interface.


I agree. It would be nice to get J's framework in and refactor your Dist stuff to use it. I would be OK with just including Bisection and Secant as initial implementations. Other implementations could be added by us or users later.


Phil

Brent Worden
http://www.brent.worden.org


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to