Re: [compress] Need API Feedback/Advice for ZipArchiveOutputStream ans ZIP64

On 2011-08-08, Phil Steitz wrote: > As a test of whether or not it will work, I would recommend writing > the javadoc and test cases first (which of course we all do any way ;) Javadocs are there now with svn rev 1155223, in particular

Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

2011/8/8 Phil Steitz : > > +1 to the idea of using the Observer pattern; but -0 for > Observable.  I would favor defining Events and Listeners because a) > Observable is concrete, so effectively forces you to create an > Observable delegate > I'm not sure I understand. Components in java.awt also n

Re: [math] Testing for convergence in iterative algorithms

2011/8/8 Phil Steitz : > > Sounds reasonable.  Have a look at the StoppingCondition interface > and its implementations in the genetics package.  Something like > that would probably work. > > Phil > I wasn't aware of o.a.c.m.genetics.StoppingCondition. It's exactly what I would need, only slightl

Re: [compress] Do we want formats without write support (Unix dump, maybe RAR)?

On Aug 8, 2011, at 23:26, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi, > > in JIRA Bear Giles has provided an ArchiveInputStream implementation for > the Unix dump format. AFAIU writing an output stream would be quite > difficult in particular since the format requires information not > available to Java and the

[compress] Do we want formats without write support (Unix dump, maybe RAR)?

Hi, in JIRA Bear Giles has provided an ArchiveInputStream implementation for the Unix dump format. AFAIU writing an output stream would be quite difficult in particular since the format requires information not available to Java and the road to JNI/JNA doesn't look like one I'd like to take right

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

A few comments on the list of points against slf4j below... On 08/08/2011 05:58 PM, Elijah Zupancic wrote: > From what I can tell from the thread, here are the following points > against SLF4J: > > * Log4j developer V2 would like to see the Apache community support > the project rather than puttin

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Elijah Zupancic wrote: > > Another option is to try to work with Ceki to address some of the > concerns of the commons community with regards to using slf4j. > > * There is a hassle with too many jars for dependencies with slf4j. > * Every time Ceki goes on vacation

Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

> > a useful feature for *any* iterative algorithm would be the > > possibility to call a "monitor" at the end of each iteration. What > > would this monitor do would pretty much depend on the user's mood: > > periodically backup the state of the algorithm (in order to restart it > > in case of a c

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

OK. Note that -- in a similar vein to what you proposed -- I'm also fine with simply keeping commons-logging as is. The really nice thing about commons-logging is that it is based on an API (like SLF4j but unlike jul!). Therefore, it is really easy for people to do whatever they want -- e.g. for p

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

Raman, You may have proposed this earlier in the thread and I didn't catch it. I actually like your suggestion the best, but it seems like it is a difficult sell for a lot of people to compile against the slf4j API for a variety of reasons that are not strictly code related. My suggestion was int

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

> > [...] > >>> Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" > >>> category. > >>> Thus: > >>> > >>>throw new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, parameters.length); > >>> > >>> or, to get a more detailed message, > >>> > >>>OutOfRangeException e

Re: [math] Testing for convergence in iterative algorithms

On 8/8/11 11:46 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > Hi, > discussions regarding the development of iterative linear solvers > (MATH-581) triggered the following issue. Usually, a default > (efficiently implemented) convergence checker is provided for each > standard linear iterative solver. However, it

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On 08/08/2011 04:56 PM, Elijah Zupancic wrote: > This could be done by choosing (dynamically or by configuration) the > logger implementation log4j / commons / slf4j / jul and then loading > the LoggerFactory into a wrapper class that is then called used by the > Commons project. > > We would then

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:25:00PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/8/11 12:03 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hi. > > > >>> [...] > > Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" category. > > Thus: > > > > throw new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, parameters.length); > >

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

> The biggest issue I have with SLF4J is figuring out the dependencies > that I need. I really detest having an API jar and then an > implementation/bridge jar. I find that too annoying. I cannot see how that is annoying. It's simple and it works. What's annoying you about this? -

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 09:55:49PM +0200, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 08/08/2011 21:25, Phil Steitz a écrit : > >On 8/8/11 12:03 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > >>Hi. > >> > [...] > >>Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" category. > >>Thus: > >> > >> throw new Ou

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

I agree with this sentiment. In the last 3 years all of the large commercial projects that I have worked on used slf4j just for the very reason that I needed to bridge the logging implementations in multiple third-party libraries. While reading this thread, one approach occurs to me that hasn't be

Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

+1 on JMX framework. On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/8/11 11:52 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > > Hi, > > a useful feature for *any* iterative algorithm would be the > > possibility to call a "monitor" at the end of each iteration. What > > would this monitor do would pr

Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

On 8/8/11 11:52 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > Hi, > a useful feature for *any* iterative algorithm would be the > possibility to call a "monitor" at the end of each iteration. What > would this monitor do would pretty much depend on the user's mood: > periodically backup the state of the algorithm

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On 8/8/11 12:55 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 08/08/2011 21:25, Phil Steitz a écrit : >> On 8/8/11 12:03 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> Hi. >>> > [...] >>> Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" >>> category. >>> Thus: >>> >>>throw new OutOfRangeExceptio

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

Le 08/08/2011 21:25, Phil Steitz a écrit : On 8/8/11 12:03 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hi. [...] Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" category. Thus: throw new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, parameters.length); or, to get a more detailed message, OutOfRangeException

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On 08/08/2011 03:28 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Raman Gupta wrote: >>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with simply >>> using slf4j? It is an extremely simple, widely used library that >>>

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Raman Gupta wrote: >>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with simply >>> using slf4j? It is an extremely simple, widely used library

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Raman Gupta wrote: >> Perhaps I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with simply >> using slf4j? It is an extremely simple, widely used library that >> provides out of the box hooks for many logging f

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Raman Gupta wrote: >> Perhaps I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with simply >> using slf4j? It is an extremely simple, widely used library that >> provides out of the box hooks for many logging f

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On 8/8/11 12:03 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > Hi. > >>> [...] > Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" category. > Thus: > > throw new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, parameters.length); > > or, to get a more detailed message, > > OutOfRangeExceptio

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Raman Gupta wrote: > Perhaps I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with simply > using slf4j? It is an extremely simple, widely used library that > provides out of the box hooks for many logging frameworks including > log4j and logback, simple to configur

Re: [lang] where did org.apache.commons.lang.math.RandomUtils go?

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:18 AM, David Karlsen wrote: > Hi. > > org.apache.commons.lang.math.RandomUtils does not exist in lang3 and I could > not find anything in the migration guide. > Are there any alternatives in lang3? Nope - it was removed as not having enough value. Which part were you usi

Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

How about just serializing the object? -Greg 2011/8/8 Sébastien Brisard > Hi, > a useful feature for *any* iterative algorithm would be the > possibility to call a "monitor" at the end of each iteration. What > would this monitor do would pretty much depend on the user's mood: > periodically bac

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

On 08/08/2011 02:00 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Simone Tripodi > wrote: If we really have to reconsider this stuff, then I'd propose to a) Use java.util.logging, because it doesn't require any additional dependencies and is guarantee

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

Hi. > > [...] > >>> Cases such as this would fall in the "illegal argument" category. > >>> Thus: > >>> > >>> throw new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, parameters.length); > >>> > >>> or, to get a more detailed message, > >>> > >>> OutOfRangeException e = new OutOfRangeException(index, 0, > >>>

[math] Monitoring iterative algorithms

Hi, a useful feature for *any* iterative algorithm would be the possibility to call a "monitor" at the end of each iteration. What would this monitor do would pretty much depend on the user's mood: periodically backup the state of the algorithm (in order to restart it in case of a crash), log a set

[math] Testing for convergence in iterative algorithms

Hi, discussions regarding the development of iterative linear solvers (MATH-581) triggered the following issue. Usually, a default (efficiently implemented) convergence checker is provided for each standard linear iterative solver. However, it would be very useful to have the ability to use a custo

[math] using the ExceptionContext facility

Hi, in the discussions regarding MATH-581, appeared the question of how to use o.a.c.m.exception.util.ExceptionContext properly. Context is nice, since it provides the method throwing the exception a very flexible way to send some additional information on what actually happened, and which object(s

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

I'm not a fan of this plan. Have you actually tried to "bridge" jul to anything? While it will work anywhere that doesn't imply it will work properly. Ralph On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi all, > > >> > >> If we really have to reconsider this stuff, then I'd propose t

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On 8/8/11 10:01 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 08:34:13AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 8/7/11 11:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 10:47:41PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: I was about to do this: throw MathRuntimeException.createArrayIndexOutOf

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 08:34:13AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/7/11 11:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 10:47:41PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> I was about to do this: > >> throw MathRuntimeException.createArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException( > >> Loca

Re: [math] right way to throw IndexOutOfBoundsException?

On 8/7/11 11:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 10:47:41PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> I was about to do this: >> throw MathRuntimeException.createArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException( >> LocalizedFormats.OUT_OF_RANGE_SIMPLE, index, 0, >> parameters.length); >> >

Re: [logging] logging vs slf4j

Hi all, >> >> If we really have to reconsider this stuff, then I'd propose to >> >> a) Use java.util.logging, because it doesn't require any additional >> dependencies and is guaranteed to work anywhere. >> b) Carefully document how to bridge jul to log4j, because that's >> exactly what's required

[lang] where did org.apache.commons.lang.math.RandomUtils go?

Hi. org.apache.commons.lang.math.RandomUtils does not exist in lang3 and I could not find anything in the migration guide. Are there any alternatives in lang3? -- -- David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen

[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: [compress] Need API Feedback/Advice for ZipArchiveOutputStream ans ZIP64

On 2011-08-08, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 8/6/11 9:30 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2011-08-06, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> On 8/5/11 9:40 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: InfoZIP's ZIP has decided to make it an option for the whole archive (the command line doesn't offer much flexibility here) and