On 9/29/15 11:26 AM, Luca Vercelli wrote: > Dear developers, > I think that commons-math lacks support for number theory and algebra. > In particular, the "primes" package is quite poor, as it only supports > "int" primes, where some "BigInteger" would be required when searching > for large primes. > Second fact, for algebra applications, Rings and such would be preferred > to Fields. > I did some try here: > https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/17
I am not opposed to adding some number theory and more discrete math applications; but in general we have steered away from adding abstractions just to have them - i.e., our aim is not to provide a universal math API. We are really an applied math library. We have always focused on applications, adding the abstractions that we need to solve the problems that [math] developers and users have in applications. For example, Field and FieldElement exist because without them we could not have implemented some algorithms (or more precisely, we would have had to implement some things separately for real and complex numbers.) Can you provide some examples showing how Rings and Monoids would be used to solve applied problems? I am asking this naively so that we can focus the abstraction that we add on the problems we are going to solve. In other words, I would be much happier extending interfaces if I had a problem whose solution was easier as a result of the added abstraction. Phil > > Luca > (Apologizes if this email was sent multiple times) > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
