Thanks for the insight, I haven't thought about it.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Robert Metzger
wrote:
> I didn't move the classes out of the file for the following reason: People
> looking at our examples might not do this with an IDE, but from Github or
> the source archive.
> Without an
I didn't move the classes out of the file for the following reason: People
looking at our examples might not do this with an IDE, but from Github or
the source archive.
Without an IDE, its harder to find those files. If the classes are located
just below the main class in the same file, there is no
+1 as long as there's a well defined template/pattern of restructuring the
code and class-naming
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Andrea Sella
wrote:
> +1 for moving to external classes, it is much simpler to analyze/study few
> little blocks of code than one bigger imho.
>
> Andrea
>
> 2016-01-
+1 for moving to external classes, it is much simpler to analyze/study few
little blocks of code than one bigger imho.
Andrea
2016-01-22 9:41 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek :
> Hi,
> the changes to the KMeans example look good so far. About moving
> everything to external classes, IMHO we should do
Hi,
the changes to the KMeans example look good so far. About moving everything to
external classes, IMHO we should do it, but I can also see why it is nice to
have the whole example contained in one file. So let’s see what the others
think.
Cheers,
Aljoscha
> On 21 Jan 2016, at 18:04, Stefano
