commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: [Math] Toward releasing 3.0 ?
Date Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:39:06 GMT
Hello.

> >>>>>> MATH-698
> >>>>>>  IIUC, "CMAESOptimizer" deals only with either no bounds or
finite bounds.
> >>>>>>  (e.g. look at method "encode", lines 904-914).
> >>>>>>  I don't have the knowledge about the algorithm in order to
know how to
> >>>>>>  modify that code so that it will behave correctly when only
one of the
> >>>>>>  bounds is infinite (a valid case allowed by the base class
for optimizers
> >>>>>>  with simple bounds: "BaseAbstractMultivariateSimpleBoundsOptimizer").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  I would not want to release an API where simple bounds are
dealt differently
> >>>>>>  in "CMAESOptimizer" than in the supposedly common interface.
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>> What do you think about this point?
> >>
> >> You ae right, consistency is important. Users should be able to switch
> >> from one algorithm to another one for such common behaviour.
> > 
> > This issue MATH-698 is still pending.

Anyone is welcome to have a look at that one...

> > 
> > Others that were not postponed to after 3.0 are:
> >  MATH-712 (trivial)
> >  MATH-707 (done or almost done, depending on the comments)
> 
> I would consider it is done.

Resolved.

> 
> >  MATH-444 (trivial)
> 
> Yes, and it is probably time to do it now.

OK!

> 
> > 
> > Unscheduled but probably to be fixed before 3.0:
> >  MATH-744
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> I'll resolve MATH-650 soon, making an arbitrary choice by myself (so you
> will know who is to blame).

I forgot that one ;-)
And also
  MATH-672


Gilles

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


Mime
View raw message