Hello,
I'm happy to announce that the Java port of the FORTRAN SymmLQ solver
is now ready for you all to review. I've tried to add as many
implementation comments as possible, since the way the iterations are
handled is not trivial. Indeed, at the k-th iterations, some x[k]
quantities are computed,
Hi Mau!
amazing work, congratulations!
I saw results http://s.apache.org/N2u can you give me please a hint
how to interpret the graphic?
What do you think about comparing performances between actual
implementation and improved implementation?
Thanks for the extraordinary effort!
Simo
http://people
On 10/21/11 3:01 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 21/10/2011 20:33, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>> should get picked up. I will look at this some more.
>>> You are right, the data flow analysis is not sufficient here. In
>>> fact, we should not only track what comes from the method
>>> parameters (i.e. t
Hi guys,
I have just committed a new maven project, principally focused on
performance analysis of the new cache implementation (see
http://s.apache.org/YKp ).
I put it on the root of the OGNL project, please feel free to move it
on the most appropriate place.
I count to publish the test results AS
Le 21/10/2011 20:33, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> should get picked up. I will look at this some more.
>>
>> You are right, the data flow analysis is not sufficient here. In
>> fact, we should not only track what comes from the method
>> parameters (i.e. the local variables), but also make sure that
Forgot to mention about checkstyle: no idea. If you built the Digester
using the provided pom, there shouldn't be ambiguity... any hint?
TIA!!!
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
On Fri, Oct
Hi Oliver,
thanks for the deep review!!
I think that under a legal point of view - NOTICE file is included in
the artifact - it would be better give another RC and take advantage
to fix also PMD violations.
Let's wait anyway for the end of the vote and see how thing go, in the
meanwhile I fix wha
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Commons Wiki" for
change notification.
The "Commons_Logging_FUD" page has been changed by KonstantinKolinko:
http://wiki.apache.org/commons/Commons_Logging_FUD?action=diff&rev1=3&rev2=4
Comment:
Correct link to Tomcat docum
Build works fine with Java 1.5 on Windows 7. Artifacts look good.
I found the following problems:
- The Copyright in NOTICE.txt says still 2010.
- The release notes claim to be for version 3.0 in the header.
- There are some PMD errors which could be addressed (not blocking).
- A bit strange: Whe
should get picked up. I will look at this some more.
>
> You are right, the data flow analysis is not sufficient here. In
> fact, we should not only track what comes from the method
> parameters (i.e. the local variables), but also make sure that a
> GETFIELD that refers to the original instance
On 21 October 2011 16:04, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 5:27 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 21 October 2011 11:03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>>> Le 21/10/2011 11:10, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
>>>
So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to drop the 1.0 and decide
upon for a 0.1 as cur
On 10/21/11 8:49 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 21/10/2011 17:04, Matt Benson a écrit :
>
>> The most immediate thing is that [proxy] 2 needs a unary predicate.
>> It becomes ridiculous for every component we have to define such a
>> basic interface in a different way. So [proxy] 2 can never be
>>
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 21/10/2011 17:04, Matt Benson a écrit :
>
>> The most immediate thing is that [proxy] 2 needs a unary predicate.
>> It becomes ridiculous for every component we have to define such a
>> basic interface in a different way. So [proxy] 2 c
On 10/21/11 8:04 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 5:27 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 21 October 2011 11:03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>>> Le 21/10/2011 11:10, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
>>>
So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to drop the 1.0 and decide
upon for a 0.1 as current r
Le 21/10/2011 17:04, Matt Benson a écrit :
The most immediate thing is that [proxy] 2 needs a unary predicate.
It becomes ridiculous for every component we have to define such a
basic interface in a different way. So [proxy] 2 can never be
released without a [functor] release, etc.
Maybe the
Thanks for your help, Seb!
Matt
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:49 AM, wrote:
> Author: sebb
> Date: Fri Oct 21 08:49:51 2011
> New Revision: 1187217
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1187217&view=rev
> Log:
> No longer in Sandbox
>
> Modified:
> commons/proper/functor/trunk/pom.xml
> c
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 5:27 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 21 October 2011 11:03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Le 21/10/2011 11:10, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
>>
>>> So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to drop the 1.0 and decide
>>> upon for a 0.1 as current release?
>>
>> Yes, or a 1.0-beta with clear ind
Thanks all for the feedback. I have just upgraded the build to target
Java 5 now.
Let the fun begin.
Emmanuel Bourg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons
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
On 21 October 2011 11:03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 21/10/2011 11:10, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
>
>> So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to drop the 1.0 and decide
>> upon for a 0.1 as current release?
>
> Yes, or a 1.0-beta with clear indications that this is a preview intended to
> gather u
Le 21/10/2011 11:10, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to drop the 1.0 and decide
upon for a 0.1 as current release?
Yes, or a 1.0-beta with clear indications that this is a preview
intended to gather user feedback.
Emmanuel Bourg
---
Hi guys,
thanks a lot for the deep review!
I didn't put any effort on the design but only to prepare the package
- like always, any suggestion is much more than welcome!
And of course we would need a lot of help to improve the quality of
the component.
So, as you proposed, would be reasonable to dr
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-exec-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This i
+1.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Simone Tripodi
wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> I'm writing to (re)call for a vote to release apache
> commons-dbutils-1.4 based on RC3.
>
> Please take in consideration that Checkstyle violations cannot be
> fixed due to retro-compatibility issue.
> Clirr error is a f
24 matches
Mail list logo
