Hi all,
I have noticed that several components - e.g. [pool], [dbcp], [lang] now
return 404s when you click the "Source Repository" link on the left
nav. It looks like the file, "source-repository.html" referenced in
site.xml for these components is no longer being generated by the site
buil
t; file comes from. When I look at
[codec], for example, that has the file (but incorrect content), I don't
see any xdoc source for it. Does the commons-build plugin somehow
generate this content?
Phil
Gary
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019, 18:27 Phil Steitz wrote:
Hi all,
I have noticed that
I am working on a patch for POOL-361. I think the analysis in the
ticket is correct and I think I know how to fix it (move validation into
create()). I think I still have commit karma, but have not committed to
commons in quite a while. Any objections to me committing directly to
[pool]?
P
n Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 6:27 PM Phil Steitz
wrote:
Hi all,
I have noticed that several components - e.g. [pool], [dbcp], [lang]
now
return 404s when you click the "Source Repository" link on the left
nav. It looks like the file, "source-repository.html" referenced in
site.xml f
, 2019 at 7:45 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
I am working on a patch for POOL-361. I think the analysis in the
ticket is correct and I think I know how to fix it (move validation into
create()). I think I still have commit karma, but have not committed to
commons in quite a while. Any objections to me
On 8/26/19 3:23 PM, ggreg...@apache.org wrote:
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
ggregory pushed a commit to branch master
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-pool.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this pus
On 8/29/19 6:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Hi All:
In https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/34, I've reduced a ton of
boilerplate code using lambdas. This also happens to fix a bunch of places
where we did not call checkOpen() when we should have.
Interesting. I have a couple of comment
. What you say above,
Roman, indicates that if we do it right we can have it both ways. That
will be great. We should just confirm performance characteristics.
Phil
Le ven. 30 août 2019 à 01:02, Gary Gregory a
écrit :
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 6:17 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 8/29/19 6:37 AM
On 9/7/19 2:30 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Hi all
What is the status of graph at commons - or apache if we have something
elsewhere?
I found in sandbox that doc
https://commons.apache.org/sandbox/commons-graph/apidocs/org/apache/commons/graph/DirectedGraph.html,
but wonder if we have somet
I don't seem to have karma to commit to commons git. I would like to
merge a PR for [pool] and add a test case. What do I need to do to get
this back? I am psteitz on github.
Phil
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@
e.org and set your GitHub user name, I do not see
it set ATM.
Gary
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 11:50 AM Rob Tompkins wrote:
IIRC that’s a Gary task, but if it’s not, I’d love to know how to
accomplish that.
Cheers, -Rob
On Sep 22, 2019, at 11:36 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
I don't seem to hav
Thanks, Seb. I was trying to merge a contributor's PR using the github
gui. I assumed that being unable to do that means I don't have karma to
push. I will try later via the command line.
Phil
On 9/23/19 5:11 PM, sebb wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 00:16, Phil Steitz wrote:
I
I would say yes, but I would also like to add a fix for the similarly
nasty POOL-326. I can do that in the next 24 hours. While I still don't
have a test case hitting it and I am not satisfied with my understanding
of why the createCount counter gets messed up, the fix in my last
comment on th
On 9/25/19 5:47 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:32 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
I would say yes, but I would also like to add a fix for the similarly
nasty POOL-326. I can do that in the next 24 hours. While I still don't
have a test case hitting it and I am not satisfied
On 9/25/19 6:10 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:05 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 9/25/19 5:47 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:32 PM Phil Steitz
wrote:
I would say yes, but I would also like to add a fix for the similarly
nasty POOL-326. I can do that in
;> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 20:22 Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 5:57 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 9/25/19 6:10 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:05 PM Phil Steitz
>>&g
requires a race between the evictor and a borrower
under the right conditions.
Phil
On 9/28/19 3:56 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 16:43 Phil Steitz wrote:
Well, I don’t have one as I don’t have a test case in hand that creates
the condition other than my hacked version of
On 10/1/19 4:27 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 5:03 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
Good news. I think I now understand the actual root cause for
POOL-376. Bad news is the fix that I committed masks but does not
really fix the problem. I will update the ticket and commit a full fix
ok right.
Phil
[1] http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-pool/scm.html
Gary
Thank you,
Gary
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 9:06 PM Phil Steitz
wrote:
On 10/1/19 4:27 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 5:03 PM Phil Steitz
wrote:
Good news. I think I now understand the actua
On 10/5/19 12:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary Gregory
wrote:
Hi Phil and all:
It looks like you merged from the "old" git repo
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/a
On 10/7/19 8:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:27 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/5/19 12:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary Gregory
wrote:
Hi Phil and all:
It
Today I tried to find where a bug reported against what I suspect is
DBCP 1.4 (I think that is likely what tomcat 7 pulls in) was fixed. It
appears to be fixed in the 1.5 branch, but it is impossible now to
actually see history via the browser. The git browser has a "history"
link, but clickin
Thanks!
I was able to see history both ways and found the tags under "releases"
Phil
On 10/11/19 4:49 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 11/10/2019 à 02:39, Phil Steitz a écrit :
Today I tried to find where a bug reported against what I suspect is
DBCP 1.4 (I think that is likely wha
+1 (nonbinding)
Checked build, sigs, reviewed changelog, release notes and ran my soak
tests. All looks good to me.
Thanks, Gary!
Phil
On 12/10/19 7:57 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
My +1
Gary
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 6:09 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
We have fixed a few bugs and provided enhanceme
On 6/29/20 12:17 PM, Robert Paschek wrote:
Hello,
DBCP has a feature to pool PreparedStatements for the lifetime of a connection.
This results in cursors being open and locks in the database for a long time,
which could cause problems with administrative tasks in the database. That why
I wou
lling to look into this.
>>
>> Can you think of a better propertyname than
>> limitPreparedStatementPoolToConnectionUse? While the meaning is clear (at
>> least to me), it's also quite long.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> From: Phil Steitz
>> Sent: Dienstag, 30.
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to wait for only one. I may be
wrong as I don't
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run
On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this
On 7/8/20 8:33 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:20 AM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is
On 7/31/12 3:34 AM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
> See answers below.
>
> On 07/31/2012 12:00 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:18:13AM +0200, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
* Why doesn't "KolmogorovSmirnovDistribution" implement one of the
interfaces of the package (and/or i
On 7/31/12 3:21 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:52:07AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 7/31/12 3:34 AM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>>> See answers below.
>>>
>>> On 07/31/2012 12:00 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jul 31,
On 8/4/12 11:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> It seems that the patch for MATH-610
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-610
> is fairly innocuous.
>
> Does anyone object to it being applied?
>
>
> Gilles
>
> -
> To
On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
> ---CUT---
> org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLargeException: lower bound
> (65) must be strictly less than upper bound (65)
> at
> org.apache.commons.math3.dis
The site build just hung on me due to
BOBYQAOptimizerTest.testConstrainedRosenWithMoreInterpolationPoints
spinning. A sample thread dump showing the spinning thread is show
below. Above the reference to
BOBYQAOptimizer.doOptimize(BOBYQAOptimizer.java:246), successive
dumps change. The code conti
On 8/5/12 3:49 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
>&g
On 8/5/12 5:30 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
[...]
The original code above illustrates the convenience of being able to
just make direct calls to randomData.nextXxx, which is why this
class exists ;)
>>> As I wrote in another post, I'm not against the convenience methods. But
>>> I
On 8/5/12 6:44 PM, ma...@nimp.co.uk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The gcd(int,int) method of ArithmeticUtils seems 2 times slower than the
> naive approach using modulo operator.
> Gilles tested the patch separately and found similar performance penalty.
> Please check it out:
> https://issues.apache.org/ji
On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
> See below.
>
> On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>
On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 05:48:14AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>>
>>> See below.
>>>
>>> On 08/06/
On 8/6/12 11:41 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> [...]
> The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
> useful. If we plan to keep it, we should probably make sure that there is
> a sample/next/... method in that class for EVERY distribution, as some of
>
On 8/6/12 2:28 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:44:24PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/6/12 11:41 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
>
On 8/6/12 2:53 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 03:13:33PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> The site build just hung on me due to
>> BOBYQAOptimizerTest.testConstrainedRosenWithMoreInterpolationPoints
>> spinning. A sample thread dump showing the spinning th
On 8/6/12 11:16 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
> See below.
>
> On 08/06/2012 05:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks
>> wrote:
>>
>>> See below.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>&g
On 8/7/12 11:29 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 07/08/2012 00:21, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>> On 8/6/12 2:53 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 03:13:33PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>> The sit
On 8/7/12 11:02 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose a new component Commons JNDI for the sandbox.
>
> The aim would be to have a very lightweight JNDI implementation (no
> server, or something like that) that's not necessarily suitable for
> production, but ideally suited for u
On 8/8/12 8:16 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Jörg Schaible
>> wrote:
>>> Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>>
Hi,
I'd like to propose a new component Commons JNDI for the sandbox.
The aim wou
On 7/23/12 3:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 22/07/2012 22:41, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> One more quick question as I begin hacking:
>>
>> Currently, abandoned object recuperation is triggered by
>> borrowObject in AOP. I am thinking about moving this to the
>> ev
On 8/7/12 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
>>> However do you have a concrete use-case for this feature?
>>> What
>> about an implementation with "BigInteger"? I'd guess that would make >
>> the feature more apt to be used in "real" applications (just
>> guessing).
>> Well I have to admit
On 8/8/12 7:58 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have encountered some missing functions that are easy to fix in
> [math]. I've done it on my local copy but would like your opinion before
> committing them.
>
> There are no function to raise a double to an int argument. There are
> similar f
On 8/15/12 4:28 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This is in relation to that other thread (with subject "spinning
> BOBYQAOptimizerTest"): http://markmail.org/message/2u6lmkuqqv6jxkgk
>
> In fact the code doesn't run "forever", but it takes a very long time to
> finish. On my machine:
> ---CUT-
On 8/16/12 1:09 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> This is a vote to release Apache Commons Configuration 1.9 based
> on the first release candidate.
>
> Tag:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_9RC1/
>
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~oheger/configuratio
On 8/7/12 9:36 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/6/12 11:16 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>> See below.
>>
>> On 08/06/2012 05:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks
>>> wrote:
>>>
&
Good catch, yes.
On Aug 21, 2012, at 7:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
>> Modified:
>> commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math3/random/RandomData.java
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math3/random/Random
On Aug 21, 2012, at 7:15 AM, Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> [...]
>>
>> Added:
>> commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math3/random/RandomDataGenerator.java
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/math/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/math3/r
Any feedback on the patch? Should I go ahead and apply the [pool]
patch?
Phil
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
On 8/22/12 12:15 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi Sébastien,
>
> Le 21/08/2012 08:50, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
>> Hi Luc,
>>
>> 2012/8/20 Luc Maisonobe
>>> Le 20/08/2012 15:52, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
Hi Gary!
> I still like the idea! I was hoping at an automagic solution ;)
Me
On 8/23/12 5:37 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 23/08/2012 13:37, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:35:18PM +0200, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>> Hi Gilles,
>>>
>>> 2012/8/23 Gilles Sadowski :
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:05:10AM +0200, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi Luc,
>>
On 8/23/12 12:42 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>> The problem is that contracts can often be written so that instances
>> of 1) are turned into instances of 0). Gamma(-) is a great
>> example. The singularities at ne
On 8/23/12 3:39 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> in MATH-851, a discussion about code- and comments-formatting as yet
> again taken place. It is true we are a bit fuzzy on this side. I
> propose to start writing something up in the developer's guide. This
> will be a start, and every one of you
On 8/23/12 4:02 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:15:58PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/23/12 3:39 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> in MATH-851, a discussion about code- and comments-formatting as yet
>>> again taken place. I
On 8/24/12 7:42 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 22/08/2012 13:51, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Any feedback on the patch? Should I go ahead and apply the [pool]
>> patch?
> Sorry for the very late review. Some comments/questions on the pool2
> part (I haven't looked at DBCP):
&
On 8/24/12 8:39 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 24/08/2012 16:22, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/24/12 7:42 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> On 22/08/2012 13:51, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>> Any feedback on the patch? Should I go ahead and apply the [pool]
>>>> patch
On 8/26/12 12:20 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 25/08/2012 23:43, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>> Hello Luc.
> Hi Gilles,
>
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 09:31:41AM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>> Le 24/08/2012 01:35, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>>>> On Thu, Aug
On 8/28/12 5:36 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>
> I thought I had. Perhaps this feature was set up after I gave up
> on this discussion.
It would be quite easy to change, if it would make your life easier.
The more so that I never saw what is gained from copying the Java hierachy
One example I often use is launch window computation for rockets.
One way to compute them is brute force simulation: you simply try
all launch times and for each one you perform the simulation of the
early orbits phase. If at any time something breaks (a polynomial
that never crosses zero, an optim
On 8/29/12 12:11 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 29/08/2012 20:31, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
>> Hello,
> Hi Sébastien,
>
>> 2012/8/29 Luc Maisonobe :
>>> Le 29/08/2012 01:40, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
Hi.
>>> Hello,
>>>
>> [...]
> I think I get your point, but again given transitive /
On 8/29/12 3:04 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> To summarize:
> (1) Does anyone disagree with having all CM exceptions inherit
> from a new "MathRuntimeException" which itself will inherit
> from the standard "RuntimeException"?
+0
> (2) Does anyone disagree with all exceptions
On Aug 30, 2012, at 4:56 AM, Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Thus, shall I open a JIRA ticket with the tasks of completing the "throws"
>>> clauses of all CM methods?
>>> Does someone absolutely needs this task tobe completed before releasing 3.1?
>>> [I don't think that it's possi
On 8/29/12 8:22 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> testing of special functions involves comparing actual values returned
> by CM with expected values as computed with an arbitrary precision
> software (I use Maxima [1] for this purpose). As I intend these tests
> to be assesments of the overall
First cut committed in r1379533. Thanks in advance for review.
Some additional comments, including some decisions made in the
patch, inline below.
On 8/24/12 9:57 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/24/12 8:39 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 24/08/2012 16:22, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>
On 9/2/12 7:35 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> here is another problem. In
> MatrixUtils.createFieldIdentityMatrix(Field, int), the constructor
> Array2DRowFieldMatrix(Field, T[][], boolean) is called. This
> constructor throws a DimensionMismatchException if the data array is
> not rectangula
On 9/2/12 4:44 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
>>> I'd like to stress that using exceptions for control flow is, by default, an
>>> anti-pattern. It should pose question about how to improve CM so that you
>>> don't have to fall back on this kind of construct...
>> Please don't focus only on th
The conclusion from [1] was never implemented and I was, once again,
confused by these properties when developing some density
integration tests last night. I would like to deprecate these
properties from the RealDistribution interface, but since removal
will have to wait until 4.0, I would like t
On 9/1/12 10:11 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
I have not tried using it, but the eclipse config that Luc posted
[1] includes this line, which I suspect configures this behavior:
I am curious why you don't like it. To me, it is similar to putting
the open paren for a method call on the preceding line
On Sep 3, 2012, at 12:25 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2012, at 14:13, Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 09:59:55AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 9/1/12 10:11 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>> I have not tried using
Slugging my way through the MATH-854 changes for the stats package,
I have found an anomaly that I would like to fix. When a Kurtosis
instance is constructed using an external moment, increment and
clear methods do not behave as no-ops as they do for Variance,
SecondMoment and the other moment sta
On 9/3/12 8:17 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> now the summer is over, it is time to revive this thread [1]. It is
> copied to both user@ and dev@ mailing lists.
>
> Recently, many problems have been found out with class
> OpenMapRealVector [2], [3], to the point that we are considering the
>
On 9/5/12 7:46 AM, er...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: erans
> Date: Wed Sep 5 14:46:59 2012
> New Revision: 1381206
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1381206&view=rev
> Log:
> MATH-841
> Performance improvement in method "gcd(int, int)" (~2 to 4 times faster than
> the previous implementati
On 9/6/12 5:16 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> [...]
>>
I was about to start a new thread too, but refrained to do so for lack
of knowledge on the history of this particular exception.
Check for null is unevenly enforced througout the library, which --to
me-- sugge
On 9/7/12 9:22 AM, marios michaelidis wrote:
> Hi Giles,
> I will start exproling the links you gave me.
> I would suggest Logistic/probit regression to go under the regerssion
> package.
Yes, these should go in regression. Thanks in advance for your
contribution!
Phil
> Not that clustering is
On 9/7/12 2:22 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> This is great.
>
> A very useful feature would be to allow basic L_1 and L_2 regularization.
>
> This makes it much easier to avoid problems with separable problems.
>
> It might be interesting to think for a moment how easy it would be to
> support generaliz
On 9/7/12 3:28 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>>> It might be interesting to think for a moment how easy it would be to
>>> support generalized linear regression in this same package. Small
>> changes
>>> t
formatting)?
>> Does it compile?
>> Did you write unit tests that cover all functionalities?
>> Do they pass?
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Gilles
>>
>>> Regards
>>> Marios
>>>> From: ted.dunn...@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Fri
test" first to verify that tests are all good and then skip
the tests when generating the site:
mvn -DskipTests=true site
Phil
On 8/7/12 12:21 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/7/12 11:29 AM, Luc Maisonobe
>> Le 07/08/2012 00:21, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>>> On 8/6/12 2:53 PM, Gill
On 9/9/12 4:34 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Further discussion on the JIRA page
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-856
> cannot reach a consensus on solving the issue that raised this thread.
>
> The proposal was that CM never checks for "null" and lets the JVM do it (and
> thus
On 9/9/12 3:26 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 09:16:51AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 9/9/12 4:34 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> Further discussion on the JIRA page
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-85
On 9/10/12 3:44 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> P.S. Is there an occurrence in CM, where a method can be passed a null
>>> argument?
>> Yes. One example is the constructor for EmpiricalDistribution that
>> takes a RandomGenerator as argument.
> Thanks for finding one of those fe
On 9/9/12 11:11 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2012/9/10 Gilles Sadowski :
>> On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 09:16:51AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 9/9/12 4:34 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> Further discussion on the
On 9/10/12 11:47 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi
> What should I do there?
> I'm trying to work on MATH-854. It turns out that FieldElement.add
> throws a NAE. Should I catch it below, and rethrow it with a more
> detailed message (including the entry index)?
IMO, yes.
I would also check v itse
On 9/10/12 3:46 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 08:47:35PM +0200, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>> Hi
>> What should I do there?
> If we adopt the "flexible" policy (cf. other post), then you can do what you
> want. ;-)
Good one :)
>
>> I'm trying to work on MATH-854. It turns out
On 9/10/12 3:43 PM, James Ring wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I'm a disinterested third party (not a CM user) but I thought I should
> chime in my two cents worth...
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> Further discussion on the JIRA page
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira
AM +0200, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>>>> Hi Phil,
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/9/10 Phil Steitz :
>>>>>> On 9/10/12 11:47 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>> What should I do there?
>>>>>
On 9/12/12 5:04 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> This thread was left alone for some time, although the main issue was not
> settled: I requested the release of a new version of CM.
>
> I quote my remarks from an earlier message in this thread:
>
>> [...] issues resulted in some work being d
On 9/12/12 8:52 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> I know this is a little of a sore subject, but in this and other
>> cases where arguments violate documented preconditions, I think we
>> should throw IAE, which means MNAE is only appropriate as long as it
>> continues to subclass our surro
On 9/12/12 11:27 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Dear all,
> in previous discussions, it was decided that Interfaces (and, I
> suppose abstract methods) should *not* have a throws clause.
I probably should have responded earlier that I personally disagree
with that conclusion. What is advertised i
On 9/12/12 4:10 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> [For those who don't wish to read the whole post, please at least go towards
> the end and indicate your preferred option. Thanks.]
>
>>> [...]
All are bad arguments violating API contract,
all detected at method activation time -> I
On 9/14/12 4:28 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:41:50AM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Le 14/09/2012 08:46, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
>>> Hi Phil
>>>
> Back to square one, with 3 fully consistent alternatives:
> 1. CM to always check for null? Then "NullArgumentEx
8AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 9/14/12 4:28 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:41:50AM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>>> Le 14/09/2012 08:46, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
>>>>> Hi Phil
>>>>>
>>>>>>
1 - 100 of 3050 matches
Mail list logo
