Re: [DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Stephen Mallette 
Don't see any ANTLR stuff in the pom or in the codebase. I think it's just
all Java with no external dependencies which is part of what makes it nice,
neat little lib.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:31 PM Marko Rodriguez 
wrote:

> I could look it up, but I could also just write this email.
>
> Do you know what parser they use? If ANTLR, mm-ADT is happy. And if its
> licensed Apache2, maybe we gut it for parts. Too Fast Too Furious style.
>
> 
>
> Marko.
>
> http://rredux.com 
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:07 PM, Stephen Mallette 
> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting - didn't expect that as an answer.
> >
> > fwiw, exp4j makes adding new functions and operator really easy. also
> just
> > a few lines of code.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:26 PM Daniel Kuppitz  wrote:
> >
> >> I agree. Calculators are the Hello World of ANTLR, thus it will be
> pretty
> >> easy to make our own lib, and it will be super easy to add new functions
> >> (e.g. if someone asks for STDDEV and PERCENTILE, it's really just a few
> >> lines of code for us).
> >> From a user perspective, there would be no difference compared to what
> we
> >> have now, everything would be string-based.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:34 AM Marko Rodriguez 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think we should create our own math library. We will need it for
> >> mm-ADT,
> >>> Kuppitz has the ANTLR chops down, …
> >>>
> >>> Marko.
> >>>
> >>> http://rredux.com 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>  On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:31 AM, Stephen Mallette 
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
>  which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is
> technically
> >>> not
>  maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit
> >> worrisome
>  that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
>  author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way
> >>> for
>  a while.
> 
>  I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
>  alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't
> >> be
>  good.
> 
>  Anyone have any thoughts on this?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Marko Rodriguez 
I could look it up, but I could also just write this email.

Do you know what parser they use? If ANTLR, mm-ADT is happy. And if its 
licensed Apache2, maybe we gut it for parts. Too Fast Too Furious style.



Marko.

http://rredux.com 




> On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:07 PM, Stephen Mallette  wrote:
> 
> Interesting - didn't expect that as an answer.
> 
> fwiw, exp4j makes adding new functions and operator really easy. also just
> a few lines of code.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:26 PM Daniel Kuppitz  wrote:
> 
>> I agree. Calculators are the Hello World of ANTLR, thus it will be pretty
>> easy to make our own lib, and it will be super easy to add new functions
>> (e.g. if someone asks for STDDEV and PERCENTILE, it's really just a few
>> lines of code for us).
>> From a user perspective, there would be no difference compared to what we
>> have now, everything would be string-based.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:34 AM Marko Rodriguez 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I think we should create our own math library. We will need it for
>> mm-ADT,
>>> Kuppitz has the ANTLR chops down, …
>>> 
>>> Marko.
>>> 
>>> http://rredux.com 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:31 AM, Stephen Mallette 
>>> wrote:
 
 Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
 which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is technically
>>> not
 maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit
>> worrisome
 that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
 author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way
>>> for
 a while.
 
 I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
 alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't
>> be
 good.
 
 Anyone have any thoughts on this?
>>> 
>>> 
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Stephen Mallette 
Interesting - didn't expect that as an answer.

fwiw, exp4j makes adding new functions and operator really easy. also just
a few lines of code.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:26 PM Daniel Kuppitz  wrote:

> I agree. Calculators are the Hello World of ANTLR, thus it will be pretty
> easy to make our own lib, and it will be super easy to add new functions
> (e.g. if someone asks for STDDEV and PERCENTILE, it's really just a few
> lines of code for us).
> From a user perspective, there would be no difference compared to what we
> have now, everything would be string-based.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:34 AM Marko Rodriguez 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think we should create our own math library. We will need it for
> mm-ADT,
> > Kuppitz has the ANTLR chops down, …
> >
> > Marko.
> >
> > http://rredux.com 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:31 AM, Stephen Mallette 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
> > > which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is technically
> > not
> > > maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit
> worrisome
> > > that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
> > > author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way
> > for
> > > a while.
> > >
> > > I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
> > > alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't
> be
> > > good.
> > >
> > > Anyone have any thoughts on this?
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Daniel Kuppitz 
I agree. Calculators are the Hello World of ANTLR, thus it will be pretty
easy to make our own lib, and it will be super easy to add new functions
(e.g. if someone asks for STDDEV and PERCENTILE, it's really just a few
lines of code for us).
>From a user perspective, there would be no difference compared to what we
have now, everything would be string-based.

Cheers,
Daniel


On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:34 AM Marko Rodriguez 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think we should create our own math library. We will need it for mm-ADT,
> Kuppitz has the ANTLR chops down, …
>
> Marko.
>
> http://rredux.com 
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:31 AM, Stephen Mallette 
> wrote:
> >
> > Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
> > which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is technically
> not
> > maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit worrisome
> > that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
> > author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way
> for
> > a while.
> >
> > I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
> > alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't be
> > good.
> >
> > Anyone have any thoughts on this?
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Marko Rodriguez 
Hi,

I think we should create our own math library. We will need it for mm-ADT, 
Kuppitz has the ANTLR chops down, …

Marko.

http://rredux.com 




> On Jul 30, 2019, at 5:31 AM, Stephen Mallette  wrote:
> 
> Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
> which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is technically not
> maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit worrisome
> that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
> author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way for
> a while.
> 
> I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
> alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't be
> good.
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[DISCUSS] exp4j

2019-07-30 Thread Stephen Mallette 
Kuppitz just answered a question on gremlin-users that involved math()
which is backed by exp4j. That made me recall that exp4j is technically not
maintained anymore. While it is a stable library it seems a bit worrisome
that we're a bit dead-ended there. The README currently says that the
author is looking for volunteers to replace him and it's been that way for
a while.

I"m not sure what the alternatives are to exp4j and I imagine that
alternatives might come with expression syntax changes which wouldn't be
good.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?