commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <>
Subject Re: clirr for MATH-389
Date Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:11:20 GMT
Le 22/07/2010 12:46, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> Hi.
>> Luc Maisonobe commented on MATH-389:
>> ------------------------------------
>> At first sight, it seems good to me.
>> You can check there are incomatibilities by performing the changes locally and run
"clirr" (for example by running "mvn site") and check the clirr report.
> Here is the report on stdout:
> ---CUT---
> [INFO] Comparing to version: 2.1
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.MessagesResources_fr: Class org.apache.commons.math.MessagesResources_fr
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.analysis.interpolation.SmoothingBicubicSplineInterpolator:
Return type of method 'public org.apache.commons.math.analysis.BivariateRealFunction interpolate(double[],
double[], double[][])' has been changed to org.apache.commons.math.analysis.interpolation.BicubicSplineInterpolatingFunction
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.optimization.DifferentiableMultivariateRealOptimizer:
Method 'public org.apache.commons.math.optimization.RealPointValuePair optimize(org.apache.commons.math.analysis.DifferentiableMultivariateRealFunction,
org.apache.commons.math.optimization.GoalType, double[])' has been removed
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.optimization.general.AbstractScalarDifferentiableOptimizer:
Field DEFAULT_MAX_ITERATIONS has been removed, but it was previously a constant
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.optimization.general.AbstractScalarDifferentiableOptimizer:
Removed field checker
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.optimization.general.AbstractScalarDifferentiableOptimizer:
Removed field goal
> [ERROR] org.apache.commons.math.optimization.general.AbstractScalarDifferentiableOptimizer:
Removed field point
> ---CUT---
> Concerning the items related to this issue:
> 3rd item: The method is declared in a superclass.
> 4th item: The constant is defined in a superclass. It is still "public" but
> I think that it's a mistake and should be made "private" instead.

No, it was intentional so users can explicitly refer to it when building
the instance.

> Last 3 items: The field still exists but in a superclass. The problem would
> have been prevented if those fields were "private" instead of "protected".
> So, what does that mean with respect to committing the changes into the
> trunk?

There does not seem to be any major problem, so you can commit your changes.

> I tried to see whether similar changes where present between 2.0 an 2.1 but
> "mvn install" doesn't work on the source tree located at:
> [I've attached the console output.]

It seems you have some network outage now, because the file is really
there and accessible. Try it several times or check your proxy setting.


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

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

View raw message