Reading over the discussion, there were some contrasting views about
which of the common complex number behaviors Complex() ought to emulate.
One commentator suggested GNU Octave. My quick take is that Octave has
some good momentum right now, with its new editor and it's GSOC
presence, and that synchronizing Complex() with GNU octave would be a
good path to take. This would also be a good way for me to get started
writing some methods that create a smooth bridge between octave and
commons. Ideally the octave standard is identical with the C99x
standard, but I don't know yet.
If the group is happy with this, I will also go mention it on
octave-maintainers and see what I can come up with for a plan.
Eric
On 23/04/16 01:27, Gilles wrote:
Hi.
Branch "feature-MATH-1290" deals with "Complex" utilities.
It is perhaps a good opportunity to review this very old
issue. And decide whether it is worth keeping it open.
Regards,
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
