.org/jira/browse/MATH-172
> [Or is that out of scope for an incubation proposal?]
Incubator is not a place to rethink code. It is primarily for building
community.
>
>
>
> Gilles
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Gilles
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 201
sary because CM is being kicked
out of Commons.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Gilles
wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:51:36 -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
>> Excuse me?
>>
>> See inline.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Gilles
>
Excuse me?
See inline.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Gilles
wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:01:13 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> I thought this had been made clear. Several months Commons voted to
>> make Math a TLP. But shortly after that most of the people involved
>> with C
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:21 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Yep absolutely. I don't think the incubator has ever rejected a project?
>
We have discouraged some submissions. But I have never seen a formal
submission be denied.
Jochen,
The need to build the community (nearly) from scratch is definitely NOT a
reason for rejection. It is simply a risk factor that must be mitigated to
succeed in incubation.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 11:29 PM, John D. Ament
> wrot
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> We generally expect some kind of backing community to bring this to. We
> have seen pretty consistently that starting from an empty community doesn't
> work. It doesn't mean that it's impossible, but very hard to do.
>
Frankly, the except
Looking back through the discussion, it is a bit of a problem that one of
the major reasons given for the fork is that the team thought that they
didn't have a large enough PMC and that incubation wouldn't get them enough
additional contributors. That made it seem like the project should go
forward
Following Guava on this has something to be said for it.
https://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/wiki/NewCollectionTypesExplained
Their decision is that Multimap#get returns a collection always. If there
are no values, then an empty collection is returned so that you can always
do
m.get
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Thomas Neidhart
wrote:
>
> There is already an issue for this:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-418
>
> It links also other implementations and algorithms, maybe you could add
> a link to your's as well?
>
Done. Thanks for the pointer.
Murthy,
I recently developed an alternative algorithm which provides superior
accuracy for extreme quantiles. You can read more at
https://github.com/tdunning/t-digest/blob/master/docs/t-digest-paper/histo.pdf?raw=true
The library involved is available via maven and is apache licensed. Apache
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 8:39 AM, luc wrote:
> Also, I think testing should be done on an actual large problem where
>>> scaling issuing would show up. The 1000x2 jaccobian would results in a
>>> 2x2
>>> normal equation. Surely this is not a good test case.
>>>
>>> Konstantin
>>>
>>>
>> As you poi
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am really having problems believing that matrix copying is the major
> problem in an optimization algorithm. Copying is O(N^2) operations. Surely,
> for any problem where performance would matter, it is completely dwarfed by
> t
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Gilles wrote:
> One way to improve performance would be to provide pre-allocated space
>> for the Jacobian and reuse it for each evaluation.
>>
>
> Do you have actual data to back this statement?
>
>
> The
>> LeastSquaresProblem interface would then be:
>>
>> voi
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 5:01 AM, Emmanuel Joliet wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-870
>
> " Recently, many problems have been found out with class ..."
> Please, consider not removing it.
> We use it heavily and need the class as it gives what we need (handling
> the input of co
.7815621241949481 0.621551704865
> 0.06657590034559915 0.6238274168581248 0.7787213901449556
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 2:17 AM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [math] t
For what its worth, I tested the Mahout SVD which shares code lineage with
the Commons Math implementation.
The results I got were:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *sum(abs(m - u * s * v')) = 4.31946146e-16S =1.002319690998
> 1.0023196909981. U =0.994059401897 0.067747631244
> -
And what exactly are the results you are getting?
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Patrick Meyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am using the SingularValueDecomposition class with a matrix but it gives
> me a different result than R. My knowledge of SVD is limited, so any advice
> is welcomed.
>
>
>
>
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> > A concrete use case could be a query engine which allows customizing its
> > string matching algorithm.
> >
>
> Is this really a use case? It sounds very constructed to me. Have you ever
> thought "I'd like to query on google, but I'd li
In my experience, examples are most useful as ... well ... examples. As
such, they should be an example of how user code works. That means that
they should be a complete stand-alone project, just as most user programs
should be complete and standalone.
If you want to also deliver a pre-compiled
>From the FAQ:
> *2.1) What is Netlib? *The Netlib repository contains freely available
> software, documents, and databases of interest to the numerical, scientific
> computing, and other communities. The repository is maintained by AT&T Bell
> Laboratories, the University of Tennessee and Oak
I had the same question.
Presumably, it is a reasonable thing to have in the corner case of needing
eigenvalues for matrices with extended precision decimal numbers or some
such, but I would be very surprised if there measurably non-zero demand for
such a feature.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:55 A
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > So the upshot is that dealing with this will cost at least a significant
> > integer degradation in performance at no benefit relative to the normal
> > user's expectations with regard to sparse vector operations. I say no
> > benefit becau
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> > is there still consensus that we are going to remove the sparse
> > implementations with 4.0?
>
> Well, I really think it is a pity, we should support this. But lets face
> it: up to now we have been unable to do it properly. Sébastien who
zation and even says so, odd. Now looking at
> fastutil...
>
> Gary
>
>
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Ted Dunning
> wrote:
> >
> >> Trove is GPL (last I looked).
> >>
> >> Mahou
Trove is GPL (last I looked).
Mahout has primitive collection implementations (and is obviously ASL).
There are other implementations such as hppc (see
http://labs.carrotsearch.com/hppc.html )
Mahout is a decent implementation, but I think that hppc has had a round or
two more optimization.
And
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Oh sorry, that's what I said early, in a real app no or not enough to be an
> issue buy on simple apps or very high thrououtput apps yes.
> Le 5 nov. 2013 07:00, "Ted Dunning" a écrit :
>
> > That i
5 nov. 2013 06:46, "Ted Dunning" a écrit :
>
> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Phil Steitz
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/4/13 3:44 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > > > The copy doesn't have to lock if you build the right data structure.
> &g
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/4/13 3:44 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > The copy doesn't have to lock if you build the right data structure.
>
> The individual stats objects need to update multiple quantities
> atomically when new values come in.
done to manage it.
>
> Phil
> > Le 4 nov. 2013 23:27, "Phil Steitz" a écrit :
> >
> >> On 11/4/13 2:22 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> >>> I still think that what you need is a thread-safe copy rather than a
> >>> thread-safe mutate.
> >>
I still think that what you need is a thread-safe copy rather than a
thread-safe mutate. Even if you force every thread to do the copy, the
aggregation still still wins on complexity/correctness/performance ideas.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> In sirona we collect
My experience is that the only way to get really high performance with
counter-like objects is to have one per thread and combine them on read.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ATM sirona (a java monitoring library in incubator) relies a lot on
> Summary stat
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> > I had proposed that error messages be incrementally built from simple
> > "base" patterns, to be assembled either at the point where the exception
> > is going to be thrown or inside specific exceptions[2] (or a combination
> > of both).
>
How many of these actually matter any more?
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Sean Owen wrote:
> In Math, is there any appetite for large patches containing many
> instances of particular micro-optimizations? Examples:
>
> - Replace:
> a[i][j] = a[i][j] + foo;
> with:
> a[i][j] += foo;
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
>> The person who raised the bug still took the trouble to do so.
>>
>
> My question is still: is it sufficient?
> Without filing a bug report, the reporter is harming himself.
>
> Also, some reports are only feature requests. I deem it quite unfai
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
> it feels a little funny just
> because then we should have similar logic for other decompositions. I
> think I remember the LU one stops early, always.
>
The stopping early is definitely an option with QR. With LU, it isn't so
clear.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
> EigenDecomposition resembles QR in this respect, as far as they are
> implemented here. This argues for them to treat arguments similarly.
>
Actually not. It is quite reasonable for the EigenDecomposition to stop
when singularity is reached.
+1
The overwhelming standard practice is to use a plausible exception type
(such as some form of IllegalArgumentException) with a message.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> I hate to open this can of worms again, but the following is just
> too painful for me to ignore.
Thread issue. Off topic for this thread. No idea how this happened.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Was this maybe to the wrong thread, or is there a doco issue here?
>
> Phil
>
> > On Oct 20, 2013, at 10:42 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> >
> >
This makes it somewhat harder to read the docs code which is where I read docs
90+% of the time.
On the other hand my IDE will do the right thing if I ask it to.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 20, 2013, at 14:27, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 11:24 PM, t...@apache.org wrote:
>> Author
In general, it is going to be very, very hard for Commons to go up against
guava. The Preconditions stuff is only the tip of the ice-berg. The
advantages highlighted in the blog are typical of every aspect of guava ...
well thought out (the different exception types and varargs for instance)
and ab
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Gilles wrote:
> The issue is closed, thank you. To be honest I'm sorry I opened this
>> issue, as it wasn't worth this much time or annoyance.
>>
>
> If the regular contributors were thinking that way, no work would be done.
> There wouldn't be a project where peop
Does this really add comparisons on average? Or does it only add
comparisons on key equality? If the latter the difference is definitely
minute.
Secondly, changing comparator value to include value changes how sets work.
Usually, this is good. Occasionally bad. In any case, a change that is
r
Careful there. Hen might suggest making that list dormant.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 16, 2013, at 0:38, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> BTW: We have already a "challenge" result, it's just terribly out of date:
> https://wiki.apache.org/commons/CommonsPeople
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I propose release votes be simple revision based requests and involve no
> artifact churn :)
>
Hen,
This is a pretty good idea.
But I still think that artifact churn will be a necessary process in order
to get enough valid QA on the artif
d a few days ago that said while consensus isn't
> unanimous it also isn't the simple majority vote either, so to state that
> consensus was reached is incorrect because there were several -1 votes.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Oct 13, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
> >
gt;
>
>
> On Sunday, October 13, 2013, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
> > Ralph,
> >
> > Majority votes at ASF almost never require a majority of all possible
> > voters. Almost always the (plus > 3 && plus > minus) convention is used.
> >
>
Ralph,
Majority votes at ASF almost never require a majority of all possible
voters. Almost always the (plus > 3 && plus > minus) convention is used.
As you can find in innumerable threads as well, consensus among the
discussion participants is preferable for big changes (like moving to git).
C
I hate myself a bit for jumping in here, but as much as I prefer git, I
really don't think that changing will make that much difference.
The problem with commons is that people have much more energy for
interminable conversations about things that don't much matter (like this
thread).
People who
I am not going, but we have a ton of guys there.
Drop by the MapR booth and say hi!
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:50 PM, James Carman
wrote:
> Is anyone planning on going? It would be great to meet some of you
> guys face-to-face for once, if you're going to be there.
>
> James
>
>
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Gilles wrote:
> The patch does not apply cleanly (special options needed to handle
> output from git?).
>
Try different prefix levels. The -p0 option is commonly helpful.
I think that it will be somewhat slower, but next to imperceptibly so.
It will not be any more accurate.
It should be noted, however, that this code will fail for input longer than
2^16 because of integer overflow.
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Dave Brosius wrote:
> I would think that in
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Then you just clone it as you
> would clone any repositories and provide a link to your own repository.
> If I remember well, Evan just did that a few days ago.
>
And you can do with it as you will.
Build a prototype without tests to make
+1
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 21, 2013, at 9:42, Ajo Fod wrote:
>
> I hope you'll agree that as it stands, this makes CM capable of only
> solving a subset the mathematical problems of what it can solve with a more
> open policy.
>
> The argument for alternative designs of the API is great to
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Ajo Fod wrote:
> If the data doesn't fit, you probably need a StorelessQuantile estimator
> like QuantileBin1D from the colt libraries. Then pick a resolution and do
> the single pass search.
>
Peripheral to the actual topic, but the Colt libraries are out of dat
This is often dealt with by using builder classes and not putting all the
fluent methods on the objects being constructed.
The other way to deal with this is to use a covariant return type. For
instance, there is no guarantee that Pattern.compile returns any particular
class other than that it re
The math is quite simple.
What is not clear is what the numerical properties are for substitution of
the sort being advocated.
Which functions will do better with substitution? Which will do better
with Laguerre polynomials?
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Ajo Fod wrote:
> The method is de
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > It still seems to me that it would serve CM well to pay more attention to
> > Ajo's comments and suggestions. Simply saying that we should focus on
> > technical discussion when CM's list is filled with esthetic arguments
> > really just s
The discussion about how to get something into commons when it is (a) well
documented and (b) demonstrated better on at least some domains is
partially procedural, but it hinges on technical factors.
I think that Ajo is being very reserved here. When I faced similar
discouragement in the past wit
t just yet.
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 7/14/13 3:24 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > We have adopted this in Mahout based on the suggestion I saw here.
> >
> > It works great.
>
> I just opened a ticket
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse
We have adopted this in Mahout based on the suggestion I saw here.
It works great.
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Ajo Fod wrote:
> I like this idea too. I"m curious to know how it works.
>
> +1
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Thomas Neidhart <
> thomas.neidh...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
A bigger question is why this is needed at all.
Why not just use composition? In guava, one would do this:
Iterables.all(Arrays.asList(foo), new Predicate() {
@Override
public boolean apply(Double input) {
return input != null;
}
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Gilles wrote:
> Did you read my other (rather more lengthy) post? Is that "jumping"?
>
Yes. You jumped on him rather than helped him be productive. The general
message is "we have something in the works, don't bother us with your
ideas".
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Gilles wrote:
> Hello.
>
> The existing LegendreGaussQuadrature class incorrectly assumes that it has
>> converged for functions where the polynomial approximation fails in a
>> small
>> corner of the integral space.
>>
>> This situation is handled much better wit
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Rodion Efremov <
rodion.efre...@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> The reason I contact you is that I wanted to make sure that I understand
> the process. (Bare with me, as this is the very first time I contact ANY
> open-source community.) Now, is the following procedure ac
alyzer/SuccessionBasedDictionaryAnalyzer.java
>
>
> 2013/3/13 Othmen Tiliouine
>
> > I remplaced the patch
> >
> > 2013/3/13 Ted Dunning
> >
> >> You seem to have reformatted the entire file. This makes it nearly
> >> impossible to review y
You seem to have reformatted the entire file. This makes it nearly
impossible to review your suggested change.
Can you make a diff that doesn't involve changing every line in the file?
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Othmen Tiliouine <
tiliouine.oth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i puted the suggestio
Othmen,
The common way to contribute code is to file a bug report/enhancement
request at the correct commons component:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/BrowseProjects.jspa#10260
My guess is that you want collections which is at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS
Then you s
Indeed.
In fact, I have found threading of algorithms of very limited utility since
I generally have parallelism at a higher level of the system and threading
just gets in my way.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> ...
> Exactly. So why do this when cleaning up linear al
Another common use is with junit to import assertEquals and such.
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Benedikt Ritter
> wrote:
>
> > ...
> > We haven't decided yet how to handle static imports. To form some rules,
> > we'd like to hear what othe
This will be very useful.
Sampling from discrete ECDF's is also closely related to generating samples
from a multinomial distribution. I did a bit of work on the latter
problem. The result of that work is in
org.apache.mahout.math.random.Multinomial
The major difference that you will have is t
My apologies, but I have totally lost track of who said what because too
many comments have enormous lines immediately adjacent to responses.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Somebody wrote:
> I thought that maybe it was due to the underlying
> (dynamic) data structure for sparse vectors/matrice
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Sébastien Brisard <
sebastien.bris...@m4x.org> wrote:
> > Please mention that when I first mentioned in-place operations, I didn't
> have speed in mind, but really memory.
>
> I think we would not gain much speedwise, as Java has become very good at
> allocating
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Agreed we should keep the discussion concrete. Sebastien and Luc
> have both mentioned specific examples where the overhead of matrix
> data copy and storage creates practical problems. Konstantin
> mentioned another (Gaussian elimination) w
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> If we stick to
>
> 0) algebraic objects are immutable
> 1) algorithms defined using algebraic concepts should be implemented
> using algebraic objects
>
> ...
> 0) Start, with Konstantin's help, by fleshing out the InPlace
> matrix / vector i
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
>
> ...
> > There would be no burden on the user's side: the visitor pattern has been
> > implemented for RealVectors in version 3.1. Besides, we could provide all
> > the relevant visitors (addition, scaling, …)
>
> There is an additional
The GPU requires native code that is executed on the GPU. Standard linear
algebra libraries exist for this so if the API can express a standard
linear algebra routine concisely, then the GPU can be used. General Java
code usually can't be executed on a GPU.
There is some late breaking news on th
Konstantin,
We are close then. Yes optimization should use vector methods as possible.
But visitor functions are very easy to add in an abstract class. They
impose very little burden on the implementor.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> I think we might have a misund
Dim has it exactly right here.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Dimitri Pourbaix wrote:
> In optimization, the user supplies the function to be minimised. In curve
> fitting, the user supplies a series of observations and the model to be
> fitted. Trying to combine both into a unique scheme (
array access. I just don't want the vector
> operations to be tied to any particular implementation detail.
> >
> > On Dec 29, 2012, at 6:30 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> >
> >> Actually, the visitor pattern or variants thereof can produce very
> >> performa
Actually, the visitor pattern or variants thereof can produce very
performant linear algebra implementations. You can't usually get quite
down to optimized BLAS performance, but you get pretty darned fast code.
The reason is that the visitor is typically a very simple class which is
immediately i
Can you say more about how you implemented these?
The Pearson coefficient should be quite simple. A few passes through the
data should suffice and it can probably be done in one pass, especially if
you aren't worried about 1ULP accuracy.
The Spearman coefficient should be no worse than the cost
Google has a nice @ExposedForTesting annotation that they use for this.
There are numerous instances in guava where otherwise private methods are
exposed to the test suite for testing. It makes a lot of sense, and there
are no questions to anybody looking at the code about what is happening.
If
Correctness isn't that hard to get. You just need to add a bitmap for
exceptional values in all matrices. This bitmap can be accessed by sparse
operations so that the iteration is across the union of non-zero elements
in the sparse vector/matrix and exception elements in the operand.
That fact i
That's fine. I think raw use of reflection might make the tests pretty
complicated, but the idea is reasonable.
Jmockit allows mocking of static methods (I have used it to mock
System.nanoTime(), for instance). By using a partial mock class, you can
gain access to private methods as well.
On Th
I can only say from my own experience that people make mistakes over time and
having the code warn them when that happens is a good thing.
Your experience may be different but I have to admit that I have done some
pretty silly things along the lines of forgetting to follow some constraint.
Actually, I would still recommend checks. You may know what the code does
now, but you can't trust either yourself or somebody else in the future.
Better to do the checks.
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Gilles Sadowski <
gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> Then the answer would be: no
> ch
Another way of looking at the builder style is that it is Java's way of
using keyword arguments for complex constructors. It also allows a
reasonable amount of future-proofing.
These benefits are hard to replicate with constructors. On the other hand,
builder-style patterns are a royal pain with
Surely you meant to say no other commons library.
Builder patterns are relatively common. See guava for instance:
http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git/javadoc/com/google/common/base/Splitter.html
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> - it has been argued that usin
Yes. Sounds similar.
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > The assign methods are inherited. The signatures are like
> > assign(DoubleFunction), assign(DoubleDoubleFunction, Matrix other) and so
> > on.
>
> OK, assign looks like what I was calling "evaluate" and
> DoubleFunc
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/15/12 10:29 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Phil Steitz
> wrote:
> >
> >> Do you know how to do that with a primitive array? Can you provide
> >> some sample co
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Do you know how to do that with a primitive array? Can you provide
> some sample code?
>
You don't. See my next paragraph.
See the assign method in this class:
https://github.com/apache/mahout/blob/trunk/math/src/main/java/org/apache/mah
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 11/15/12 8:01 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> >
> > The typical answer to this when adding a functional method like compute
> is to also add a view object. The rationale is that a small number of view
> methods can be compose
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:46 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> >> This is a false dichotomy.
> >>
> >> Maven site generation can work with ASF CMS if desired.
> >
> > That is sort of true but doesn't really apply to commons. I created the
> Flume site using Maven and Maven generates the site from RST so
The typical answer to this when adding a functional method like compute is to
also add a view object. The rationale is that a small number of view methods
can be composed with a small number of compute/aggregate methods to get the
expressive power of what would otherwise require a vast array o
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2012/11/14 Thomas Vandahl :
> > On 14.11.2012 08:40, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> >>
> >> Please, could someone who knows what to do step up?
> >
> >
> > Just a quick note that sites created by Maven can be published with
> > svnpubsub using the S
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Sébastien Brisard <
sebastien.bris...@m4x.org> wrote:
> > There is no problem with the current setup of our website (at least, the
>> website generated locally has no problem).
>
>
For the new system, I would like to step up, but I really (really) have
> no clue
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 14/11/2012 08:59, Ted Dunning a écrit :
>
> > All you need to do is translate the pages to mark-down text, copy and
> adapt
> > a few headers and stick the resulting files into a standardized directory
> > st
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Please, could someone who knows what to do step up?
>
I can't volunteer the time to do this, but I can say that process is really
quite simple. We switched with Drill and the results are not bad at all.
See http://incubator.apache.org/dr
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> 0) Did you or anyone else ever analyze the bigram data in the paper
> using Fisher's test stats?
>
That bigram data isn't particularly interesting; any text will show similar
effects.
Others have tested Fisher's exact test, but only a few ca
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski <
gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:25:08PM -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > What kind of check did you want?
>
> Well, I'm seeking to know whether the code can be included in Commons
> Math
1 - 100 of 436 matches
Mail list logo
