luc.maison...@free.fr wrote: > ----- "Gilles Sadowski" <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> a écrit : > >> Hello. >> >> I'm ready to make the changes proposed in >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-348 > > Hi Gilles, > > Sorry, I forgot to comment on the issue. I agree with you, go ahead with the > changes. >
+0 Sorry to be late to the party on this. I suspect the reason for encapsulating getters originally for distribution parameters was to allow implementations to compute them from internal state, which might not map directly to distribution parameters. This is the case for some of the other distributions not listed in the ticket. Look, for example, at how ChisquareDistributionImpl implements getDegreesOfFreedom. Changing implementations so parameters are not stored in instance fields for the classes above after this change will require that the change be reverted. With contemporary JDKs, I am not sure the performance impact is worth considering. Overrides should not cause a problem unless they incorrectly compute the parameters, which are all defined (some better than others ;) in the interface documentation. I am OK with the change, but do not see it as necessary. Phil > Luc > >> Any objection? >> >> Best, >> Gilles >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
