Hello Leandro. > >> > >> Thanks for your suggestion ! I Downloaded the sources and i will > >check them soon. If I am correct , Maxima is implemented in Lisp > >(or CLisp) but I guess it could be feasible , once they had been > >analyzed and studied , to translate those algorithms into Java. > >> > > > >That's great Leandro. I was merely referring to the API, not really > >the implementation of the different algorithms. However, if you > >feel > >like diving into Lisp source code, good luck! ;) > >Also, I seem to remember that you were willing to propose new > >features > >regarding wavelets. I myself do not use these beasts, but I would > >tend > >to think that such a feature would probably find a wider audience > >among the CM users than tensor algebra. Maybe you could then > >prioritize, as developing a whole new set of features will eat up a > >lot of your time? > > > >What do others think about wavelets vs. tensor algebra? > > I admit I am more inclined towards developing a wavelet transformation > package. In fact I made a post in the ML about it sometime ago [1] , > but since I got no response , I just thougth there was no interest in > Wavelets.
That's not the right conclusion. If there had been arguments against including <some feature>, you would have gotten a response. :-) The central point is: It's is not primarily other people that have to be interested in a feature (that you would develop) but yourself; and most importantly, developing a feature implies that you would be ready to support it. IMHO, that would also rule out developing something as a programming exercise, when there is a chance that nobody will use it (if even you don't). In that situation, there is the danger to not discover shortcomings of the implementation that appear more clearly when you apply it to real-world problems. > [...] Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org