Piggybacking on what Dave said, Plumbr's latest stats on JDK usage as their
stats collection measure it:
https://plumbr.eu/blog/java/java-version-and-vendor-data-analyzed-2016-edition
Hank
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Dave Brosius
wrote:
> People stuck on Java 6, for whatever inane reason,
A more reasonable and measured article that appeared in JavaWorld:
http://www.javaworld.com/article/3003197/security/library-misuse-exposes-leading-java-platforms-to-attack.html
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Donald Freeman
wrote:
>
> I wanted to forward this on. I found this article this m
I've seen some ApacheCon North America videos on YouTube (9) but not this
one. Will a video of it be posted at some point or were those only for the
keynote type presentations?
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> James Carman and I had a brief conversation following my Apache
No objection, but it might be useful to know which element of the diagonal
caused that as well. For smaller matrices it would be trivial to find but
for larger ones it may take some looking.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Gilles
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1210
u, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Gilles
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 12:05:27 -0500, Hank Grabowski wrote:
>
>> You would think so, but Java 6 hasn't been updated since early 2013 and is
>> still a quarter or more of the installed Java base. The support for
>> highly
r the project.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Gilles
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 07:52:11 -0500, Hank Grabowski wrote:
>
>> Good call, Silviu!
>>
>> The most recent version of their survey of Plumbr installations (823 in
>> total) was May of last year, only a few
Actually conflict resolution on multiple default methods is a little more
complicated (just fast forward to the 20 minute mark for the discussion on
that):
http://medianetwork.oracle.com/video/player/1113272518001
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Hank Grabowski
wrote:
> If you are referr
. At this point I'm not sure how we would use this feature
> as API designers, but it is another tool in the tool box.
>
> I think 7 or 8 would be a good choice.
>
> Regards,
> Evan
>
> On 01/14/2015 11:20 PM, Silviu Burcea wrote:
> > I think Rebel Labs or Plu
r have some metrics about JDK usage.
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Hank Grabowski
> wrote:
>
> > Java 8 has only been out for less than a year. There is still a sizable
> > percentage of groups that have not converted up to Java 8 for myriad
> > reasons. Whi
Java 8 has only been out for less than a year. There is still a sizable
percentage of groups that have not converted up to Java 8 for myriad
reasons. While I was surprised that we are requiring backwards
compatibility with the ten year old Java 5 I think jumping all the way to
requiring Java 8 ma
+1
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> +1
>
> Phil
>
> On 12/19/14 8:54 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> > This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons Math 3.4 from release
> > candidate 1.
> >
> > Tag name:
> > MATH_3_4_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')
No objection.
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Gilles
wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 21:44:58 +0100, Gilles wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>>
>> The class
>>
>> "o.a.c.m.analysis.interpolation.SmoothingPolynomialBicubicSpli
>> neInterpolator"
>> breaks binary compatibility due to the replacement of
>> "Bicubi
No, I just ran the unit tests in Eclipse
Sent from my Android phone
On Nov 28, 2014 8:23 AM, "Gilles" wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 07:21:46 -0500, Hank Grabowski wrote:
>
>> I had heard about the JDK 8 issues in previous threads. What are they? I
>> recently
I had heard about the JDK 8 issues in previous threads. What are they? I
recently installed JDK 8 on a Windows machine with all JDK 7 installs
removed and all unit tests passed on that build. Is the issues outside
something that the unit tests are flagging?
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Gill
I was pleasantly surprised to see that you got the coefficients and
algorithms from that article working. I'm surprised it was a flipping of
the coefficients. When I re-implemented it in Octave a flipped coefficient
matrix caused for more havoc than the correctly oriented one. The
"correctly ori
That's good that there has been some progress on this. Are you looking for
discussions here or in the JIRA incident?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gilles
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Please have a look at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1166
>
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
>
> -
There are known problems with the bicubic interpolation algorithm. In the
current head revision there are now PiecewiseBicubicSpline interpolators
that may get you what you need. Can you try that and see if you are
getting the results you expect?
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Ajo Fod wrote:
All,
I have restored the original files but added deprecation and accuracy
warnings. The new interpolators are now in their own "Piecewise" surnamed
classes. All tests in the entire JUnit suite passed.
You can find the details of the pull request here:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pu
n, 20 Oct 2014 19:33:25 +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>
>> Le 20/10/2014 16:00, Hank Grabowski a écrit :
>>
>>> I have some time this week to try to get these changes made to the
>>> interpolators. I don't want to do anything without consensus however.
>>&
s and then initiate a follow-up one.
How does that sound to everyone? We need to get accurate interpolators in
the next release, so the sooner I can squeeze this into my schedule to get
this committed the better.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Hank Grabowski
wrote:
> I didn't want t
he
pull request discussions, were good. Obviously that didn't work out as
well in practice as I had hoped.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:24 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 17 October 2014 21:16, Hank Grabowski wrote:
> > The nice thing about Github, from my perspective as a person with only
&g
The nice thing about Github, from my perspective as a person with only
read-only access to the ASF repositories, is that it provides me with the
ability to work in my own fork and then initiate pull requests that can be
incorporated into the root repository. I think it is still ideal that the
GitH
rted, but
> hopefully you can all three agree on a way forward.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On 10/17/14 8:31 AM, Hank Grabowski wrote:
> > Gilles,
> >
> > This is the original changes to get the bicubic spline working. These
> were
> > originally committed as a di
development and communication to have
yet another reaction like this. It is as or more frustrating to me as it
appears it is for you.
Sent from my Android phone
On Oct 17, 2014 10:24 AM, "Gilles" wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:46:53 +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>
>&g
future.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi Hank,
>
> Le 16/10/2014 20:20, Hank Grabowski a écrit :
> > OK. I submitted the pull request yesterday. I'm going to now remove the
> > diff from JIRA.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/
OK. I submitted the pull request yesterday. I'm going to now remove the
diff from JIRA.
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/2
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 9:36 AM, luc wrote:
> Le 2014-10-14 15:16, Hank Grabowski a écrit :
>
>> Should I try an experiment with that with t
:
> Hi Hank,
>
> Le 2014-10-14 15:01, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:36:07 -0400, Hank Grabowski wrote:
>>
>>> It seems that the GitHub repository is now staying in sync with the ASF
>>> repository. Is the preferred workflow going to be (or alread
It seems that the GitHub repository is now staying in sync with the ASF
repository. Is the preferred workflow going to be (or already is) forking
inside of GitHub and then doing pull requests or will the workflow be to
work directly with ASF? For someone like me with only read only access to
the
All,
I've completed MATH-1138 ( BicubicSplineInterpolator is returning incorrect
interpolated values ). It is generating substantially better values. I am
using the Akima Spline algorithm that I added to the library (with unit
tests). For the planar test the error off the truth function went from
ous to everyone else.
Thanks!
Hank Grabowski
Chief Technology Officer
10440 Little Patuxent Parkway, Suite 600
Columbia, MD 21044
(410) 715-0005 Office
(410) 715-0008 Fax
(301) 525-6219 Mobile
h...@applieddefense.com
www.AppliedDefense.com
This is awesome! I much prefer distributed SCMs over SVN, not that SVN
didn't represent significant improvements over the alternatives before it.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 09/21/2014 08:53 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The migration to git has
31 matches
Mail list logo
