Le 31/10/2010 15:08, Gilles Sadowski a écrit : > Hi. > > [Continued from the previous message.] > > Accepting that the interpolation abscissae are not sorted in strictly > increasing order make it necessary to check (at every call to the "value" > method) that no 2 interpolating points are the same. > The code would be cleaner is we assume (as a pre-condition) that the "x" > interval is sorted. [And it would be more similar to other interpolating > classes that explicitely prohibit unsorted interpolation intervals.]
So I guess you would put this check in the verifyInterpolationArray method which is called from constructor and remove the d == 0 check in computeCoefficient ? Beware that the static evaluate method can be called directly from outside. We need to keep this public method, so we may perhaps split it as a check followed by a call to a private internal method that does no check, whereas the value instance method would directly call the no-check version since the check would have been done beforehand in the constructor. Luc > > If we nevertheless want to allow the user to pass an unsorted interval, I'd > rather have a new utility method that would sort the "x" interval (and apply > the corresponding permutations to "y") within the constructor. > > > 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
