[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-123?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16876767#comment-16876767
]
Gilles commented on NUMBERS-123:
--------------------------------
I understand your reluctance.
However, this discussion also is a hint that the initial setup was not clear
(and it was hiding a bug in that the fields ONE and ZERO were initialized in an
awkward way).
Since the constructor is private, its correct usage only depends on the
components' developers: The sole purpose of the flag is efficiency, when we
*know* that the call will result in an instance that fulfills the requirements
for further use of the object.
IOW, the constructor is the lowest-level (flexible) factory whose usage is
controlled by higher-level factory methods ("of" and "from").
> "BigFraction(double)" is unnecessary
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: NUMBERS-123
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-123
> Project: Commons Numbers
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: fraction
> Reporter: Gilles
> Assignee: Gilles
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 1.0
>
> Attachments: NUMBERS-123__Javadoc.patch
>
> Time Spent: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Constructor {{BigFraction(double value)}} is only called from the
> {{from(double value)}} method.
> Actually, this constructor is misleading as it is indeed primarily a
> conversion from which appropriate {{numerator}} and {{denominator}} fields
> are computed; those could be set by
> the "direct" constructor {{BigFraction(BigInteger num, BigInteger den)}}.
> Moreover, the private field {{ZERO}} goes through this conversion code
> whereas it could constructed "directly", e.g. using {{of(0)}}. Similarly for
> field {{ONE}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
