commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1042610 - /commons/proper/math/branches/MATH_2_X/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math/linear/RealVector.java
Date Tue, 07 Dec 2010 12:19:42 GMT
On 7 December 2010 09:18, Gilles Sadowski <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> On 6 December 2010 22:21, Gilles Sadowski <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>> >> >> > -     * @deprecated in 2.2 (to be removed in 3.0). Please
use
>> >> >> > -     * {@link #map(UnivariateRealFunction)} directly with
>> >> >> > -     * the function classes in package
>> >> >> > -     * {@link org.apache.commons.math.analysis.function}.
>> >> >> > +     * @deprecated in 2.2 (to be removed in 3.0).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why not leave the reference to #map(UnivariateRealFunction) ?
>> >> >
>> >> > Because the package "function" does not exist in MATH_2_X.
>> >>
>> >> I know that, but #map(UnivariateRealFunction) does exist (in the same
>> >> source file).
>> >>
>> >> It was only the reference to the package name that was wrong.
>> >>
>> >> If the replacement for the deprecated methods is not
>> >> #map(UnivariateRealFunction), then whatever is the replacement should
>> >> be specified in the Javadoc.
>> >
>> > The replacement is the method "map" (which exists) together with the
>> > appropriate function (which doesn't, unless someone wants to backport the
>> > "function" package).
>>
>> There are several implementations of UnivariateRealFunction, e.g.
>> PolynomialFunctionLagrangeForm.
>>
>> Are these not suitable as parameters to the map method?
>
> They are, but they do not provide a replacement for the deprecated methods,
> which is the point of a more detailed deprecation message.
>
>> > I think that we agreed with Phil that when the replacement doesn't exist, it
>> > is sufficient to warn the users with a terse deprecation message.
>>
>> I don't think it is right to leave the user totally in the dark as to
>> how to resolve the deprecation warnings.
>
> There is no possible resolution in 2.2. The deprecation warning says: "You
> will have to modify that code when upgrading to 3.0".

In which case the upgrade path should be mentioned elsewhere in the
release documentation.

But if we already know what the methods are in 3.0, why not add a note
to the class Javadoc to give the user the information they need?

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

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


Mime
View raw message