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] Incorporating JAMA code to solve problems?
Date Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:07:14 GMT
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.


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.
>

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