Hi Pallavi, I personally agree that keeping the name as part of the mathematical vector is wrong, because it leads to not only the issues you've brought up, but also means we still have these *4* different ways of saying that two vectors are "the same": ==, equals(), equivalent(), and strictEquivalence(). For sparse vectors, its probably quicker, actually, to do x.minus(y).iterateNonZero() checking to see it's the zero vector.
Where do we actually currently use the names? Like, not in theory, but practice? -jake On Mar 17, 2010 10:46 PM, "Pallavi Palleti" <pallavi.pall...@corp.aol.com> wrote: Hi Jeff, It is not clear to me. If we are saying that the name represents the document ID the vector comprises of, then probably we can have a wrapper class which includes vector and name rather having it as part of Abstract vector. I might be missing something here. Kindly clarify. Thanks Pallavi On 03/17/2010 06:44 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote: > > Pallavi Palleti wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Could some ...
