It probably v. good, but exactly? Also how being used, I don't know how you would scale R, but you may wish to scale your usage of commons. There is the issue of notation, I don't think Java is very maths friendly, at least I don't find it so.
Adam On 29 April 2010 14:10, Michael Stover <[email protected]> wrote: > And does the performance compare between R and commons math? > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Sachin Dole <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Thank you! I reached a similar inference reading up on the site and now > > after reading this email I feel like I have a strong confirmation. Thanks > > again. > > > > On Apr 28, 2010 9:11 PM, "Phil Steitz" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Sachin Dole wrote: > > > R probably has a large superset of features that math provides while it > > > tries... > > You are correct that in general R provides a superset of what > > commons math does, though there are a few things that commons math > > provides that R does not. There is a lot of overlap and in many > > cases the functionality that is provided by commons math is similar > > to what R provides, though of course the APIs are different. We test > > some of the commons math implementation classes against R (see the R > > subdirectory in src/test). Commons math will not be of much value > > as a wrapper / invocation framework for R; but it can be used > > directly to do some of the same computations that R does. This was > > part of the original motivation for creating commons math. > > > > The best way to get an overview of what is provided by commons math > > is to look at the User Guide: > > http://commons.apache.org/math/userguide/index.html > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 2010 6:22 AM, "Rory Winston" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Sachin > > > > > > Common... > > >
