On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 12:24:03AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/6/11 12:18 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > >> +1, but your observation above then leads to the question where are > >> you going to get this value from? There may not be a solver to read > >> it from. I guess the default impl in the base class could just > >> return BaseAbstractUnivariateRealSolver.DEFAULT_FUNCTION_VALUE_ACCURACY. > >> > >> Phil > >> > > Ah, that's one option I didn't think of. I intended to follow the same > > scheme as for getSolverAbsoluteAccuracy(), which returns > > solverAbsoluteAccuracy (private field), possibly initialized with > > DEFAULT_SOLVER_ABSOLUTE_ACCURACY (see AbstractContinuousDistribution). > > Actually, using the BaseAbstractUnivariateRealSolver default value is > > probably better. However, these default values are private... So maybe > > we will have to select reasonable default values here. > > Ugh. I remember complaining about that (the fact that the defaults > were made private) for precisely this kind of reason. Have to clone > the value, I guess and keep it in synch with whatever Brent uses. > > Phil > > Sébastien
[I did not follow all the details of this discussion; sorry if I'm slightly off base.] But, if somewhere some _default_ accuracy is needed to pass to a _default_ solver, I'd say: instantiate the solver using its _default_ constructor; thus, no need to chase up instance variables used further up the hierarchy. Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
