[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12557972#action_12557972
]
Bob MacCallum commented on MATH-173:
------------------------------------
Re: class vs. category - I will definitely go for category (e.g. categorydata)
- I actually already use "category" in the upstream code I needed ANOVA for
because class was too confusing.
I would happily just go with "Collection of double[]" if it means avoiding the
addition of a new Category Interface and Class simply to wrap a name and
double[] together. I don't fully understand the sentence "This would separate
the name/data association feature from the multiple category feature." could
you explain please?
Would the API accept a Collection (of anything) and the arg checking code would
ensure the collection contained all double[] or all Category? In that case we
could start with Collection (of double[]) and add the ability to handle named
data in future versions (if required) without breaking anything.
I probably understand that sentence now.
Thanks for the 1.3 help!
What are the deadlines for this?
> One-way ANOVA
> -------------
>
> Key: MATH-173
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-173
> Project: Commons Math
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Affects Versions: Nightly Builds
> Reporter: Bob MacCallum
> Fix For: 1.2
>
> Attachments: Anova.java, AnovaImpl.java, AnovaTest.java
>
>
> Here is some proposed code to add one-way ANOVA tests to commons-math
> I will be attaching
> src/test/org/apache/commons/math/stat/inference/AnovaTest.java
> src/java/org/apache/commons/math/stat/inference/Anova.java
> src/java/org/apache/commons/math/stat/inference/AnovaImpl.java
> I followed TTest as a style guide.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
