Hello, assuming that no answer meant no (strong) opposition, I took the liberty to create MATH-795 [1]. This refactoring has already revealed a problem (see r1344570 and r1344571).
Best regards, Sébastien [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-795 2012/5/30 Sébastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org>: > Dear all, > while working on MATH-792 [1], I've noticed that the above mentioned > tests contain a lot of duplicate code. Besides, some of the unit tests > are no longer (in my opinion) unit tests, since they test many > different functionalities. > I would be tempted to refactor these tests. I've recently implemented > RealVectorAbstractTest for testing the various implementations of the > visitor pattern. That's probably the place where the code should be > factored out. > Besides readability, the benefit would be use of implementation of > other kinds of vector. The immediate benefit for me would be for the > implementation of views of vectors (which have been discussed some > time ago on the ML): testing would be almost trivial (I hope). I think > this refactoring would also lead to a natural resolution of MATH-625 > [2]. > > It could be argued that this is counter-productive, as I would be > doing again what has already been done (and works!). I do not know if > we intend to release 3.1 soon, in which case this proposal might be > postponed. > > What do you think? > > Best regards, > Sébastien > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-792 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-625 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
