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-608) Remove methods from RealMatrix Interface
Date Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:20:24 GMT
That won't work.

That only works for statically declared matrix types, not run-time matrix
types.  To be usable, the suggested mechanism must work against runtime
data-types.

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Matthew Pocock <turingatemyhamster@gmail.com
> wrote:

> You may get more mileage by having a matrix operation interface that has is
> parameterised over the two matrix types. It would have things like multiply
> once and you would have different concrete implementations for different
> pairs of matrix types. The implementations can even be provided via one of
> the matrix classes to allow it to take advantage of the matrix internal
> structure without exposing it.
>
> On 1 Jul 2011 22:49, "Ted Dunning" <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Double dispatch was the wrong term.  I should have said double argument
> polymorphism.  Double dispatch is a sub-optimal answer to the problem of
> double polymorphism.
>
> Apologies for polluting the discussion with a silly error.
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Greg Sterijevski <gsterijevski@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
>
> > Ted,
> >
> > I am not sure why you think there will be double dispatch. If we remove
> the
> > multiplica...
>

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