commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Libbrecht <>
Subject Re: [math][functor] MathBeans was: (Re: [math] ... just one more reference...)
Date Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:22:41 GMT
Mark R. Diggory wrote:
> I understand you logic behind maintaining a Context with info concerning 
> precision. It is sensible.

Note that this was not the context in the sense of a "configuration" or 
such (e.g. that would say which algorithm should be used to do this or 
that)... It was more the description of an evaluation-process.

A more funky EvaluatingContext would be the computation of types or 
return types....

> precision is always going to be an important issue.

That can all make it hard...

> I've use commons pool before. The important thing to point out is that 
> you need to always return your objects to pool after your done with 
> them. It may be tricky to maintain if things like MathObjects can get 
> handed outside of the EvaluatingContext in any way.

At worst, that's done in the finalize method...
Only routines that will return the object to pool will be efficient, 
that's about enough for a rationale.
Commons-pools is probably a good choice...

Still not wanting to have this in commons-math ?
Anything about this policy of having a single artifact per commons 
sub-project ?


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

View raw message