Quoting Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I have finished with the coding / docs tasks that I thought needed to get > done before 1.0. There are no open BZ tickets and the reports (checkstyle, > javadoc, clover) are looking OK. I regenerated and published the site > based on the current build this AM. Other than the changes required to get > the right names associated and cut the release, is there anything else > that needs to be fixed / completed prior to 1.0? >
I'm out of town this week, but feel free to release without me if you feel up to it. > I am tempted to make one more API change; but am ambivalent about it: > Currently the API for (non-paired) TTests uses a boolean flag to indicate > whether or not the test is being performed under the hypothesis of equal > subpopulation variances (homoscedastic test). Recently, [lang] added a > development guideline to avoid boolean flags in APIs. I thought about > splitting the homoscedastic tests out (as I did the paired tests); but > decided not to (partly because of the long name and proliferation of > methods). Does anyone feel strongly that this should be changed? > Why avoid returning boolean flags? They are as much part of the Java API as anything else? I whish I had my usuall mail application, I'd search and review the discussion. Can you post briefly why [lang] decided this? I'm not convinced yet that its a necessity, the API can be changed in future versions. -Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
