Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BF96F695-D181-4341-8AAB-82F7CF1F770A@dslextreme.com>
References: <bc54ffbe6482ef9373084b94c710233c@scarlet.be> <CAMBJEmX8Np7JmPTO2eThLXaqvk+hBDr38iDxEGAukydNij=7=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <6ff149d4cfcd6400c6718adb7304b15d@scarlet.be> <CAF8HOZJp+Fjs4o8WRW5jBvXEj9J5m64dLvpMg3PJKJBOEnHkdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <60C01FBE-96C3-45E9-B49F-46FC8D981559@dslextreme.com> <CAB3PPZqx_xWsEP4msqVHGUz7M6H0dVY+yT2ibvs7-aPKVkMYHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB3PPZryr8HSSKozNukjfsZeUaaLsh4y6-tDV9M+=e+=PEa2xg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6484f36a3833f7c71ebe530e93aa93a6@scarlet.be> <BF96F695-D181-4341-8AAB-82F7CF1F770A@dslextreme.com>
From: Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:21:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CACZkXPxLWVZZu3a-QHyW+kk9C-cQCRJ26Bi6B_EsyDXxnBZ-bg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] "Fraction" also in Commons Lang (Was: [VOTE] New
 component: Rational numbers)
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d159ef140ca05364b9e51
archived-at: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:21:48 -0000

--001a113d159ef140ca05364b9e51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> 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 i=
t
> there because Commons Math is too specialized. I read Gary=E2=80=99s comm=
ent as a
> rebuttal to the person who said Fraction was =E2=80=9Cfoundational=E2=80=
=9D 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, perhap=
s
> the Fraction support in Commons Lang should just be enhanced.
>

From my Smalltalk days, I fondly recall Smalltalk's Fraction [1] being a
basic object like Integer, very cool. So yeah, it could happily live as a
first class citizen in Commons Lang AFAIC. But what I do not want to decide
when I am coding up an app, is which Fraction to use, the one from Commons
Foo, Commons Bar or FooBar. I want one well maintained class I can rely on.

[1]
https://chara.cs.illinois.edu/sites/cs528/files/arithmetic-and-double-dispa=
tching-in-smalltalk-80.pdf

Gary

>
> 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 ve=
ry
> >>> topic.  It was quite some time ago so I do not recall the reasoning f=
or
> >>> keeping both at that time.  I will try sifting through the archives t=
o
> 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=E2=80=99t you be able to. The user would be able to conti=
nue 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>
>


--=20
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--001a113d159ef140ca05364b9e51--