commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From S├ębastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org>
Subject [math] Double.NaN or NotStrictlyPositiveException?
Date Mon, 20 Aug 2012 03:51:14 GMT
Hi,
the current implementation of Gamma.logGamma(double) fails silently when
the argument is not strictly positive, returning Double.NaN.
Previous discussions on this ML show that we all agree (do we?) that
throwing an exception is preferrable. Since I'm reimplementing this
function, I propose to change this behaviour. Do you think that would be
allowed in 3.1?

I do not think it breaks binary compatibility. Neither does it break the
contract of this method, since (quite fortunately) its behavior was not
specified in the Javadoc!

Thanks for your suggestions,
S├ębastien

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