On 10/3/11 7:00 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > Hello, > I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am > sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups > (no multiplication) and Rings (no division). This would allow me to > carry out some calculations on different types of number simply by > changing the generic type. > I was thinking of adding some interfaces along the lines of the two > above mentioned > - AbelianGroup<T>, AbelianGroupElement<T>, > - Ring<T>, RingElement<T>. > > Do you think that would be useful?
If you have practical applications, then OK; if this is just to have more math abstractions, we have generally been conservative about that (i.e., introduce the abstractions as we need them for practical applications). Can you describe a little the use cases? Phil > > Thank you very much, > Sébastien > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
