commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [math] Questions about the linear package
Date Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:22:44 GMT
I think that Luc was referring to non-backwards compatible changes.  Adding
methods should not be in this category, but removing them would be.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.mannix@gmail.com> wrote:

> Question about this: if RealVector is locked as an interface - no changes
> until
> 3.0 - and the Matrix and Vector interfaces have method signatures which
> take
> RealVector as an argument, how is adding new methods to an implementation
> of RealVector (say AbstractRealVector) going to help anyone?
>



-- 
Ted Dunning, CTO
DeepDyve

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message