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] Incorporating JAMA code to solve problems?
Date Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:33:28 GMT
On 7/5/11 2:07 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> JAMA definitely is good algorithm wise.  API wise, it is very tied to a
> single representation which isn't acceptable.
>
> If you are finding JAMA more stable, then I would be +1 (in my own
> non-binding way) for copying the algorithms, but -1 for adding a dependency.

+1 by all means if you can improve the algorithms in [math] by
borrowing from Jama, patches are welcome.  Some of the [math] linear
algebra algorithms are already adapted from Jama. 

Phil
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Chris Nix <chris.nix@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> CM is a great package, but I email to inquire if could we could solve
>> easily
>> the issues above by simply implementing public-domain JAMA-like code within
>> the linear algebra sub-package or, perhaps more controversially, have JAMA
>> as a dependency to CM?
>>
>> Is 'home-grown' code over public-domain code an objective of Commons Math?
>>  Like I say, it's a bold question.
>>


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


Mime
View raw message