On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am sympathetic to Jake's point of view in general, but I think that the > math stuff is a bit of a special case. > The math (Colt) stuff is a special case, and in fact, is one which will lull us into a sense of security by having warnings go away, because it's still way low on test coverage. But, we did go an run my nice "auto-deprecator" ruby script on it, so we at least still have those warnings... *shrug* That code still has way more issues than just formatting, it's done in an entirely different style, was aimed at compiling against, like jdk1.2, and really needs some care and attention, and maybe possibly even some *use* at some point! -jake > > I have had two patches recently that could have been affected. One was > adding test cases and correcting some of the distribution code (a kind > angel > committed that already). Another is beginning of work on stochastic > matrices. > > I am happy to rebase any work that I have pending. > > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Nobody asked you to spend any time on anything though. Does it mess up a > > patch? Say so and nothing would happen until ready. So not sure what > other > > issue is lurking here but lets discuss if needed rather than feel funny > > about it. This should be easy and fun. > > > > On May 29, 2010 2:35 PM, "Jake Mannix" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ok, I'm done wasting time on this issue. People want to reformat > > huge swaths of code, have a blast. > > >
