Iterative linear solvers (MATH-581) again

Good morning, my proposal for the implementation of linear iterative solvers (JIRA MATH-581) has raised some comments from Gilles and Luc, but I think no consensus has been reached on one issue raised by Gilles. Before submitting a new version of the corresponding classes, I'd like to make a new pr

Re: (MATH-608) Remove methods from RealMatrix Interface

It seems a viable option to me, as long as the Javadoc is explicit enough. Sebastien

Re: [math] puzzled by generics in root solvers

Why? On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Gilles Sadowski < gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > By the way, shouldn't "EITHER_SIDE" be renamed to "ANY_SIDE"? >

Re: (MATH-607) Current Multiple Regression Object

If it helps, there is a new LSMR implementation in Mahout. Steal it at will. We are moving to having at LinearOperator interface specifically for conjugate gradient methods like LSMR and power methods like Lanczos or stochastic projection decompositions. On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Greg Ster

Re: (MATH-608) Remove methods from RealMatrix Interface

+1 from me. On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Greg Sterijevski wrote: > Is the consensus, then, that we leave the interface alone and handle all > possible cases inside the body of the method? >

Re: (MATH-608) Remove methods from RealMatrix Interface

Is the consensus, then, that we leave the interface alone and handle all possible cases inside the body of the method?

(MATH-607) Current Multiple Regression Object

Hello All, I have an open issue with respect to improving the linear regression techniques in Commons. The current regression technique has some limitations. Before introducing new implementations, I thought it better to suggest two interfaces. One interface would define an api each regression imp

Re: [VOTE][DIGESTER] Release Apache Commons Digester 3.0 based on RC2

Hi Simone, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi all guys, > after a failing RC1, thanks to Luc's suggestions I've quickly prepared a > RC2. Please cast your votes and many thanks in advance for your effort on > reviewing!!! > All the best, have a nice weekend, > Simo > > Release Notes: > > http://people.

Re: [math] Incorporating JAMA code to solve problems?

On 7/5/11 2:07 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > JAMA definitely is good algorithm wise. API wise, it is very tied to a > single representation which isn't acceptable. > > If you are finding JAMA more stable, then I would be +1 (in my own > non-binding way) for copying the algorithms, but -1 for adding a d

Re: [math] puzzled by generics in root solvers

Hello Luc. > [...] > > > > If such a fine control ("AllowedSolutions") is a desirable/necessary > > feature, couldn't we directly add it at the level of the base class > > (and > > interface)? I.e. the main "solve" method would become: > > > > public abstract class BaseAbstractUnivariateRealSol

Re: [math] Incorporating JAMA code to solve problems?

JAMA definitely is good algorithm wise. API wise, it is very tied to a single representation which isn't acceptable. If you are finding JAMA more stable, then I would be +1 (in my own non-binding way) for copying the algorithms, but -1 for adding a dependency. On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Ch

Re: [math] puzzled by generics in root solvers

Hi Gilles, - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : > Hello. > > > [...] > > > > > > The purpose of the "BaseUnivariateRealSolver" is to avoid code > > > duplication in CM. It must be general enough so that CM > developers > > > should > > > not implement an "AbstractXxxsolver" that would not inherit

[math] Incorporating JAMA code to solve problems?

All, I've been working on another implementation of SVD as in issue MATH-355, I'm mostly there. However, I'm consistently impressed with the JAMA code. I email to ask a question that is perhaps quite bold for one such as me, so new to Commons Math.

Re: [VOTE][DAEMON] Release Apache Commons Daemon 1.0.6

Hi Mladen! +1 * java source code successfully compiled with both java1.5 and java1.6, using maven 3.0.3 * release notes is OK * verified .md5, sha1 checksums and asc signature using an extended version of our Christian Grobmeier's script (http://www.grobmeier.de/checking-md5-and-signatures-wit

Re: [lang] Time for RC3?

Am 05.07.2011 00:17, schrieb Jörg Schaible: Oliver Heger wrote: Hi Jörg, Am 02.07.2011 16:28, schrieb Jörg Schaible: Hi, Henri Yandell wrote: These are the current blocking items in play afaik: * Email thread - what else should implement Formattable? * LANG-696/Email thread - getShortName

Re: [math] puzzled by generics in root solvers

Hello. > [...] > > > > The purpose of the "BaseUnivariateRealSolver" is to avoid code > > duplication in CM. It must be general enough so that CM developers > > should > > not implement an "AbstractXxxsolver" that would not inherit from it. > > OK, so I think we need to introduce slight changes.

Re: [math] puzzled by generics in root solvers

Hi Gilles, - "Gilles Sadowski" a écrit : > Hi. > > > > > I am a little puzzled by our use of generics in the > analysis.solvers > > package. > > > > Hoping the following ASCII art will survive mail, > > It's very nice! :-) > > > here is a rough > > overview (simplified) of what we have.

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project commons-proxy-test (in module apache-commons) failed

To whom it may engage... This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html, and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org. Project commons-proxy-test has an issue affecting its community integration. This

Re: [VOTE][DIGESTER] Release Apache Commons Digester 3.0 based on RC2

This is my +1 signatures are now OK, binaries have asc/md5/sha1, checkstyle/javadoc/findbugs errors have been resolved. Also 3.0 branch in the site (apidocs/release notes) are OK. Run & compile on both java5/java6 on Mac OSX Thanks Luc for your feedbacks, they helped *a lot* of improving the releas