commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark R. Diggory" <>
Subject Re: [math] Questions regarding probability distributions
Date Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:36:57 GMT
I definitely against removing these implementations. These 
interfaces/implementations provide a a unique set of methods on that 
specific species of Gamma distribution that are required to configure 
and maintain that species of Gamma distribution.

Removing the underlying implementations and making a 
GammaDistributionImpl implement the ChiSquareDistibution interface is 
risky and difficult venture, there would be no way to enforce the 
"immutability" of the scale parameter required to maintain its 


Kim van der Linde wrote:
> Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Good point. I am +0 for dropping ChiSquaredDistributionImpl, but -1 
>> for exponential (because of efficiency).  Unless others object, I will 
>> make that change.  Thanks for pointing this out.
> I do not mind HOW it is in the package, but I would argue against an 
> option where the user has to know which parameters need to be fed to an 
> more general underlying distribution, especially when it is a common 
> used one such as chi-square. Unless of course, you want to limit this 
> package to a hard core public only.
> Cheers,
> Kim

Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message