commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gilles (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (NUMBERS-10) Revamp "Complex" representation ?
Date Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:25:44 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-10?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15878750#comment-15878750
] 

Gilles edited comment on NUMBERS-10 at 2/22/17 5:25 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------

bq. Necessary for whom?

I meant: Necessary for what?  IOW: Is there a use case?
If not, let's wait until it is required in order to solve one.

bq. Seems like a useful enough method

Only if you can come up with a situation where it is useful.
For one, I find it awkward to define {{equalsIEEE}} when there is nothing in IEEE to compare
its behaviour with! ;)



was (Author: erans):
bq. Necessary for whom?

I meant: Necessary for what?  IOW: Is there a use case?
If not, let's wait until it is required in order to solve one.

bq. Seems like a useful enough method

Only if you can come up with a situation when it is useful.
For one, I find it awkward to define {{equalsIEEE}} when there is nothing in IEEE to compare
its behaviour with! ;)


> Revamp "Complex" representation ?
> ---------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NUMBERS-10
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-10
>             Project: Commons Numbers
>          Issue Type: Wish
>            Reporter: Gilles
>              Labels: API, design, review
>             Fix For: 1.0
>
>         Attachments: CartesianRepresentation.java, Complex.java, MixedRepresentation.java,
PolarRepresentation.java
>
>
> This is a proposal to enhance the internal representation of complex numbers.
> The purpose is to allow usage of both cartesian and polar representations, with the aim
that calculations are performed (transparently) with the one that will be more accurate and/or
faster. 
> The API would certainly be improved, from
> {code}
>         final Complex c1 = Complex.valueOf(1, 2);
>         final Complex c2 = ComplexUtils.polar2Complex(2, 7);
>         final Complex r = c1.add(c2);
>  {code}
> with the current code, to
> {code}
>         final Complex c1 = Complex.createCartesian(1, 2);
>         final Complex c2 = Complex.createPolar(2, 7);
>         final Complex r = c1.add(c2);
> {code}
> Please refer to the attached files (they are self-documenting, but of course, Javadoc
must be added if the proposal is validated).
> Would there be merit in pursuing in that direction?
> Or is there any show-stopper?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message