On Sun, 05 Jul 2015 22:31:27 +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Le 05/07/2015 21:39, Gilles a écrit :
On Sun, 05 Jul 2015 18:32:16 -0000, l...@apache.org wrote:
Add getXmax, getXmin, getYmax, getYmin to BicubicInterpolatingFunction.

These can be useful to manage an OutOfRangeException without the need to
access the original x and y arrays.

IIRC, this "feature" has been requested before but eventually without a convincing use-case. [In general, the user knows the valid range since
he called "interpolate".]

User do not always keep the arrays. As the interpolator does jeep them,
we just have to ask it.

That might be the case but I'm talking of agreeing on the API!

Personally, and only if the feature is useful, I'd have considered
methods like:

public double[] getInterpolationRangeX() {
  return new double[] { xval[0], xval[xval.length - 1] };
}


Closes #9.

Shouldn't we discuss API change on the ML?

If we start discussing every single getter, we will grind to halt. We
are already not responsive enough (and I put most of the blame on myself).


Isn't that the one rule to abide by?

Git pull requests are not forwarded here anymore. And I find it respectful towards the project's committers, who (try to) comply with the rules, that
they are not bypassed.

Please don't take me wrong; I do not mean that everyone should have voted on every topic before a commit is performed; many (most) recent changes and
improvements have come about without any such discussions.
However, in this case, I feel that we start again to add "features" that might just be bloat ("because we can"). To please an "anonymous" one-time contributor? I find it more productive to incite him/her to comply with what we want the library to be (e.g. the method naming scheme) and possibly
change the pull request accordingly...

Or please let people say clearly here, that it is fine to commit anything and let the burden of further modification to those who want to challenge it after the fact; possibly leading to further overwrites but the proponents
of the preceding version, etc.
IIUC this would be a change of policy. Please correct if I'm wrong (i.e.
the above has always been fine).


Regards,
Gilles


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to