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: [math] last steps before releasing 2.2 ?
Date Thu, 27 Jan 2011 01:00:38 GMT
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Gilles Sadowski
<gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 05:33:09PM -0500, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Luc Maisonobe <Luc.Maisonobe@free.fr> wrote:
>> > There are only two issues left in Jira for 2.2.
>> >
>> > I think MATH-488 could be considered resolved as the class has been
>> > deprecated as requested 5 days ago.
>> >
>> > Concerning MATH-487, I understood we are going to keep
>> > ConvergenceException as a base class for a bunch of lower level
>> > exceptions. Who volunteers for this task and on what time frame ?
>> >
>> I will create JIRA and post a patch with the new exceptions this weekend.
>
> How is this related to 2.2 ?
> To avoid breaking user-code, it's safer not to change the raised exception.
> [Or is it still the issue of easing the transition to 3.0 ?]
>
Good point.  It could probably be done in a backward compatible way,
but on second thought I agree with you it is best to postpone this
change until 3.0.  That will give us time to talk about and get the
design right and there is no reason to hold 2.2 up for this.

> What also remains to do is to add deprecation tags in all the exception
> classes that are outside the package "exception".
> I can do that.
>
>> > Apart from these Jira issues, Phil wanted to remove binary
>> > incompatibilities. We said the incompatibilities in ODE could not be
>> > removed as they are internal only and required to fix bugs. We did not
>> > conclude on FunctionException/DerivativeException.
>>
>> You convinced me (twice actually, sorry :) that there is no immediate
>> user impact due to FunctionEvaluationException changes.  One thing
>> that I did not mention before is that for UnivaritaRealFunction
>> specifically, the new setup implies that *all* UnivariateRealFunctions
>> are going to be user-defined functions.   I am not sure that this is
>> strictly true (aren't there some places where [math] code creates
>> UnivariateRealFunctions?)
>
> Yes, the interpolators for example.

>> [...]
>
>
> 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