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] Binary or text resource files?
Date Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:44:09 GMT
Hi S├ębastien.

> right, until we reach a consensus, I've inlined the reference data as
> double[][], trying to keep those arrays to a reasonable size.
> I really would like to provide publicly available extensive validation
> of all special functions we have (and will) implement. It seems to me
> very important. BOOST does that, which I think lays a standard we
> ought to live up to.

That's certainly a valuable effort. Thanks.

> I'm just not sure what the right way to do this
> is. Surely, using unit tests for this is a bit far-fetched. Gilles was
> talking about a side-project: did you mean a whole new project in
> SANDBOX?

No, I don't think so. I just meant that such reports could form an annex to
the user guide.
As there are already directories like "src/test/java", "src/test/resources",
"src/test/R", there could be something like
  src/test/reports
  src/test/reports/data
  src/test/reports/templates
  src/test/reports/bin
where programs in "bin" would generate reports by reading their input from
"data" and format them according to the "templates" (for example).

> That project would then not be a library, but rather a set of
> executables which produce nicely formatted reports on the accuracy of
> o.a.c.m.special, to be included in the User's guide of CM? Is that
> what you had in mind, Gilles?

Indeed.

There could also be reports about performance (micro-benchmarking) and
actual use-cases.


Best,
Gilles

> What do others think?
> 
> S├ębastien
> 

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


Mime
View raw message