Hi, My opinion is that the package should be organized by what it does rather, than how it does it. My thinking is
optim optim.scalar. optim.scalar.linear optim.scalar.socp (second order cone programming)' optim.scalar.qcqp optim.scalar.nonlinear optim.scalar.nonlinear.derivfree optim.scalar.nonlinear.derivfree.Powell, etc optim.scalar.nonlinear.newton optim.scalar.univariate.* optim.leastsquares.linear optim.leastsquares.nonlinear But I am flexible. Perhaps it is worth a look here: http://www.joptimizer.com/ > > Shall we also introduce entirely new packages? > > optim > > optim.scalar.noderiv > optim.scalar.noderiv.PowellOptimizer > optim.scalar.noderiv.SimplexOptimizer > optim.scalar.noderiv.CMAESOptimizer > optim.scalar.noderiv.BOBYQAOptimizer > > optim.scalar.gradient > optim.scalar.gradient.NonLinearConjugateGradientOptimizer > > optim.vector > optim.vector.jacobian > optim.vector.jacobian.AbstractLeastSquaresOptimizer > optim.vector.jacobian.LevenbergMarquardtOptimizer > optim.vector.jacobian.GaussNewtonOptimizer > > optim.scalar.univariate.noderiv > optim.scalar.univariate.noderiv.BrentOptimizer > > > Regards, > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
