commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] "Fraction" also in Commons Lang (Was: [VOTE] New component: Rational numbers)
Date Mon, 27 Jun 2016 23:55:35 GMT
Your reading and mine are a bit different. Stephen Colebourne wanted Fraction kept in Commons
Lang as he felt users would find more value in it there because Commons Math is too specialized.
I read Gary’s comment as a rebuttal to the person who said Fraction was “foundational”
for Commons Math.  No one ever suggested Fraction deserved to be its own project.  

After looking at both Lang and Math my feeling is that Fraction is simply too small to warrant
being a project on its own.  Does what is in Commons Math really provide any value over what
is in Commons Lang? If so, perhaps the Fraction support in Commons Lang should just be enhanced.

Ralph

> On Jun 27, 2016, at 3:51 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:34:47 -0500, Brent Worden wrote:
>> One previous thread on the subject:
>> http://markmail.org/message/u7lcxd6ye6qnesku <http://markmail.org/message/u7lcxd6ye6qnesku>
> 
> The final sentence of that thread:
> "So I do not see Fraction as the foundation for anything really.
>  It stands on its own nicely IMO."
> 
> What more adequate conclusion would be than to have a standalone
> Commons component?
> 
> [And the majority of the thread participants seemed to agree.
> Yet the inertia prevailed.]
> 
> Gilles
> 
>> Brent
>> 
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Brent Worden <brent.worden@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Somewhere in the mailing list archives is a discussion around this very
>>> topic.  It was quite some time ago so I do not recall the reasoning for
>>> keeping both at that time.  I will try sifting through the archives to find
>>> the thread if I find time.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Brent
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> > On Jun 27, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <
>>>> jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Is it a complete overlap with what is in CM's package
>>>> >> "o.a.c.m.fraction"?
>>>> >> Should one be dropped in favour of the other?
>>>> >
>>>> > *Can* we drop either, while maintaining BC?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Why wouldn’t you be able to. The user would be able to continue using the
>>>> old version if the need it.
>>>> 
>>>> Ralph
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@commons.apache.org>

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