If we want to be consistent, we could deprecate [lang]'s min/max and point to [math]. This would parallel nicely with c.lang for java.lang and c.math for java.math. It does not seem right to add all primitive types to c.lang.NumberUtils if min/max routines are in c.math.
Gary -----Original Message----- From: Mark R. Diggory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 15:18 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [lang] NumberUtils minimum, maximum, and xor Just to note: we have moved somwhat along these lines in the the commons [math] sandbox component. Currently we have o.a.c.m.stat.StatUtils: double min(double[] doubleArr) double max(double[] doubleArr) available there. -Mark Diggory _matthewHawthorne wrote: > I have 2 observations: > > (1) Currently, the following methods are in o.a.c.l.NumberUtils > > int maximum(int a, int b, int c) > long maximum(long a, long b, long c) > int minimum(int a, int b, int c) > long minimum(long a, long b, long c) > > I think it be more flexible to replace them with the following: > > int minimum(int[] intArr) > int maximum(int[] intArr) > long minimum(long[] longArr) > long maximum(long[] longArr) > > It also may be a good time to add any missing methods such as: > > short minimum(short[] shortArr) > short maximum(short[] shortArr) > float minimum(float[] floatArr) > float maximum(float[] floatArr) > double minimum(double[] doubleArr) > double maximum(double[] doubleArr) > > Any thoughts? > > > (2) After searching for an easy way to xor booleans, and not finding > anything, I created a method: > > boolean xor(boolean[] boolArr) > > Would this be a good addition to NumberUtils? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
