[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-894?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13497274#comment-13497274
]
Phil Steitz commented on MATH-894:
----------------------------------
I had the same thought about the dependency and agree it is better not to have
it. I wonder if there is an even better design somehow. This is one place
where the lack of array reference semantics limits us in Java. I am OK with
the subclass solution if we can't think of anything better.
+1 for deprecating the initialCapacity field and setter (but need to leave them
in for compatibility until 4.0)
> Cleanup of "ResizableDoubleArray" ("o.a.c.m.util")
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MATH-894
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-894
> Project: Commons Math
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.0
> Reporter: Gilles
> Assignee: Gilles
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
> Attachments: MATH-894.patch
>
>
> Method "addElement" should not call "contract()", as it will almost always
> make the storage array shrink on the first call since it will be considered
> "too big" (for just storing one element).
> See discussion about this change in MATH-757.
> Miscellaneous code modifications are also proposed in order to improve
> encapsulation.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
