commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dimitri Pourbaix <>
Subject Re: [math] major problem with new released version 3.1
Date Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:23:47 GMT

>> I can understand Dimitri's frustration, it seems the optimization
> framework gets worse with every iteration. However, we should probably
> look forward and think about how to design it properly instead.
> +1 - though we have the constraint that we need to maintain backward
> compatibility until 4.0.  If we decide it is too far gone, we have
> to drop that and either cut 4.0 "quickly" (will probably be hard for
> us, given all of the other refactoring we want to get done for 4.0)
> or make an exception.

I have no frustration wrt CM.  I only think that rather than wanting
CM to handle everything in every possible way, its developers should
limit the implementation (e.g. rely upon user's pre-multiplication
rather than offering a matrix of weights approach) and make sure those
are intensively tested and bug free.

>> 4) Testing should be done on larger problems.
> +1 - I think it would be great to add some test classes not executed
> on each build to test large problems.  Do you have some we can use?

In the framework of a space mission, I do test some aspects of the linear
algebra package (QR, SVD) and optimization (LevenbergMarquardt) on millions
of problems.

Dimitri Pourbaix                         *      Don't worry, be happy
Institut d'Astronomie et d'Astrophysique *         and CARPE DIEM.
CP 226, office 2.N4.211, building NO     *
Universite Libre de Bruxelles            *      Tel : +32-2-650.35.71
Boulevard du Triomphe                    *      Fax : +32-2-650.42.26
  B-1050 Bruxelles                        *        NAC: HBZSC RG2Z6     *

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

View raw message