You have done a pretty good job in making the optimization package
non-sensical to user.
+1
Check your facts ("svn log", JIRA, this ML), please: All modifications
were done in plain sight, and responded to identified problems which
I cared to solve.
I do not deny that it could have raised issues for cases which I did
not foresee. But all the requests for clearly defined
use-cases,
benchmarks,
actual (i.e. working) code examples,
have been met with unhelpful "do it yourself" statements.[1]
Whatever we try here, including going somewhat in the direction you
suggested for singling out algorithms aimed at solving a (non-linear)
"leastsquares" problem:[2]
http://markmail.org/message/nkceta2cskpgbkug
raises unsubstantiated criticism that never[3] translated into
_practical_ advice[4] on how to improve the code.
Gilles
[1] What _I_ observed and used led me to try out what I think are
improvements. I you think otherwise, _you_ have to get your hands
dirty too.
[2] Except that, at this point, it makes more sense for me, as a user,
to put it under (model) "fitting" rather than "optim", for the
reason I gave previously.
[3] And that means: NEVER.
[4] That is: an alternative Java code that compiles, runs and produces
correct answers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
