Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of squarcel@dia.uniroma3.it
 designates 193.205.219.56 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <501D2F9D.2000908@dia.uniroma3.it>
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2012 16:20:13 +0200
From: Claudio Squarcella <squarcel@dia.uniroma3.it>
Organization: Roma Tre University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [graph] renaming packages
References: 
 <CAAqLGLORW=yJ=UCxFRLwjfPjxNgpFr5-WjOOQ1Y09jkTVwktug@mail.gmail.com>
 <49474.2.158.42.218.1343861154.squirrel@email.dia.uniroma3.it>
 <CAAqLGLP_tGVEz3vBZxN_TmK7tswb_tf8Q+wtGmFbbb4UXDfCHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <51368.37.102.149.165.1343997558.squirrel@email.dia.uniroma3.it>
 <CAAqLGLOPdxO74-ZVFZAgErEQuc9u=8o9TL5bF+xMQeernTpJpg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAqLGLOPdxO74-ZVFZAgErEQuc9u=8o9TL5bF+xMQeernTpJpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi,

On 03/08/2012 15:00, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> ¡Hola!
>
>> Also remember that if we ever want to deal with, say, multiplications,
>> monoids are only going to be in the way (we already touched this topic
>> before, see [1]). I'm still happy to update and simplify names, only
>> following a different pattern: e.g. from "DoubleWeightBaseOperations" to
>> "DoubleOperations". And I'd also replace "Monoid" with "Addition".
> yeah thanks of the reminder - I was searching for it in the mail
> archives and didn't find it :P
>
> wouldn't "Multiplication" have exactly the same methods signature of
> "Addition" aka Monoid? I wouldn't replicate stuff just to implement
> markers...

Addition would have signatures like "sum" and "negate", while 
Multiplication would have "multiply" and "invert".

> Anyway I agree that algorithms need specific monoids, such as Dijkstra
> that needs Addition - guess it wouldn't work with Subtractions :P
>
> What about having Monoid with package visibility and then
> "Addition/Multiplication... extends Monoid" ?

Then it would become a bit painless if a class had to implement both 
interfaces (the current "Integer[...]Operations" is an example). I'd 
just have them fully independent from each other, without a common 
ancestor (Monoid).

>
>> After thinking a bit I'm also a bit perplexed about renaming "builder" to
>> "connect", and in general about the name of the method "connect()". You
>> know the meaning of "connected" in graph theory, while with our method we
>> could actually create a graph which is not connected (e.g. one with no
>> edges at all).
> agreed!
>
>> So I suggest to look for a less ambiguous alternative:
>> "populate" (this gets my vote)? "declare"? "construct"? "assemble"?
> +1 to "populate" (and related class renaming?)

cool. Class name = "GraphPopulator"? Though it sounds sooo bad to my 
ears... Maybe a mother tongue can help us with the matter :-)

Ciao,
Claudio

>
> thanks a lot for your feedbacks and enjoy vacations!
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>

-- 
Claudio Squarcella
PhD student at Roma Tre University
http://www.dia.uniroma3.it/~squarcel
http://twitter.com/hyperboreans
http://claudiosquarcella.com/


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