commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36060] New: - [math][patch] Integration Source Files
Date Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:16:20 GMT
On 8/15/05, J.Pietschmann <j3322ptm@yahoo.de> wrote:
> Phil Steitz wrote:
> > Great!!  I created a release branch for 1.1 and updated the POM in
> > trunk to 1.2, so there will be no contention with the release.  I also
> > committed the sources in what I think is the latest version to trunk.
> > Pls check out and make any changes you see fit.
> >
> Now that's convenient! Thank you!
> 
> BTW I'd rather created a new "Integration" or "SoC" entry in
> bugzilla and declared the existing bugs as blockers rather
> than mark them as duplicate. This way, reports from others
> could be easily tracked too without mixing them with Zhang's
> contribution. New, exiting bugzilla feature.
> (Another BTW: also a neat way to track release blocking bugs
> and feature requests).
> 
> > I think one could argue for including both kinds of things, similiar
> > to other places in [math].  Provide users with the choice to select an
> > algorithm or use a default or "adaptive" selection.
> 
> The problem is that making a reasonable choice about which
> algorithm to use requires months, if not years of education
> and experience. I'd say if we require this, a lot of people
> will be dissapointed. As I said, the holy grail is an algorithm
> which is consistently performance-wise within a factor of two
> (or five) of a carefully picked, perhaps customized algorithm,
> and either gives the correct answer or bails out for 99.99% of
> the cases anybody wants to throw at it. Including functions like
> 1/(x^3), x*sin(1/x) or 1E+6*exp(-((x-0.55555)/1E-6)^100).
> Unfortunately, unpleasant things like singularities in the
> integration interval are uncomfortably common in real world
> problems.

Which is precisely why we should give users a choice.  As I said, I am
perfectly OK with adding an adaptive algorithm if someone is willing
to step up and code it.  This is exactly the same issue that we faced
before with the solvers.  Hopefully someone will step up to implenment
the factory pattern like we have for the solvers and a reasonalble
default.

Phil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message