commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sébastien Brisard <>
Subject Re: [math] rename o.a.c.m.linear.SingularMatrixException to SingularLinearOperatorException
Date Sun, 02 Oct 2011 06:32:23 GMT
OK Phil,
I'm just worried about naming consistency. So should I drop "Linear"
everywhere? Only in exception names (where I agree, it's not that

2011/10/2 Phil Steitz <>:
> On 10/1/11 9:42 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>> My mistake! I was convinced we already had
>>   - NonPositiveDefiniteMatrixException extends
>> NonPositiveDefiniteLinearOperatorException
>>   - NonSymmetricMatrixException extends NonSelfAdjointLinearOperatorException
>>   - NonSquareMatrixException extends NonSquareLinearOperatorException
>> but looking at the javadoc, this is not the case. So I agree, your
>> third option would be the simplest.
>> As for shortening the name, I'm all for it. For consistency, I would
>> do it for every class matching the pattern *LinearOperator* if you all
>> agree. Also, I think that "linear" is as important as "operator" in
>> "LinearOperator" (even if lilnearity might seem an obvious feature,
>> provided all the classes we are discussing are actually located in the
>> linear package). So what do you think of LinOp as a compromise?
>> Something like RealLinOp instead of RealLinearOperator,
>> NonSquareLinOpException, etc...
> I like full words.   I don't know about "linear" vs "operator" in
> "LinearOperator" but I think the "linear" can safely be dropped in
> "SingularLinearOperator."
> Phil
>> Sébastien
>> 2011/10/1 Phil Steitz <>:
>>> On 10/1/11 1:21 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> I need to be able to throw an exception when an iterative linear
>>>> solver detects that a RealLinearOperator is singular. I would propose
>>>> to implement a SingularLinearOperatorException. Then, since RealMatrix
>>>> is derived from RealLinearOperator, it would be logical to have
>>>> SingularMatrixException inherit from SingularLinearOperatorException.
>>>> However, looking at the present impl of SingularMatrixException, this
>>>> exception does nothing fancy. So having two different exceptions might
>>>> be too much, I don't know.
>>>> So here are two proposals
>>>> 1. Rename SingularMatrixException to SingularLinearOperatorException
>>>> 2. Create SingularLinearOperatorException, and have
>>>> SingularMatrixException extend SingularLinearOperatorException.
>>>> Which option (or any other) do you favor?
>>> I would keep it simple and just have the two exceptions
>>> independent.  The reason for this is that the activation contexts
>>> are likely to not often have much in common - i.e., as we have
>>> discussed before, a singular matrix exception will be triggered when
>>> a matrix that is not supposed to be singular is numerically singular
>>> (usually with some kind of threshold) while a singular operator
>>> exception is going to be triggered when an operator acts
>>> singularly.  Of course, if the operator is represented by a matrix,
>>> then the specialization makes sense; but this will not always be the
>>> case, so there is not going to be meaningful state or implementation
>>> inheritance.  Therefore I don't see much value in the inheritance
>>> (think about the value of catching the superclass or inheritance of
>>> state or implementation in the exceptions themselves).  I would also
>>> shorten the name to SingularOperatorException.
>>> Phil
>>>> Sébastien
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message