On 8/7/12 9:36 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/6/12 11:16 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>> See below.
>>
>> On 08/06/2012 05:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks
>>> wrote:
>>>
See below.
Dennis
On 08/06/2012 02:48 PM, Phil
On 8/6/12 11:16 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
> See below.
>
> On 08/06/2012 05:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks
>> wrote:
>>
>>> See below.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/06/2012 02:48 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On Aug 5, 201
See below.
On 08/06/2012 05:29 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
See below.
Dennis
On 08/06/2012 02:48 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
See below.
On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Forward to commons-dev, as the reply was (accidentally?) only sent to me...
Dennis
Original Message
Subject: Re: [MATH] Test failure in Continuum
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 17:29:59 +0200
From: Phil Steitz
To: Hendriks, D.
On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Dennis Hendriks wrote
On 8/6/12 2:28 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:44:24PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/6/12 11:41 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> [...]
>>> The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
>>> useful. If we plan to keep it, we should probabl
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:44:24PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/6/12 11:41 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >>> [...]
> > The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
> > useful. If we plan to keep it, we should probably make sure that there
> > is a sample/n
On 8/6/12 11:41 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> [...]
> The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
> useful. If we plan to keep it, we should probably make sure that there is
> a sample/next/... method in that class for EVERY distribution, as some of
>
> > [...]
> >>>
> >>> The RandomData class (or whatever it would be called) does indeed seem
> >>> useful. If we plan to keep it, we should probably make sure that there is
> >>> a sample/next/... method in that class for EVERY distribution, as some of
> >>> them are missing, if I remember corr
On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 05:48:14AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>>
>>> See below.
>>>
>>> On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 05:48:14AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
>
> > See below.
> >
> > On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gille
See below.
Dennis
On 08/06/2012 02:48 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
See below.
On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hello.
On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Dennis Hendriks wrote:
> See below.
>
> On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hello.
Referring to this failed test (cf. message
See below.
On 08/06/2012 12:49 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hello.
Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
---CUT---
org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLargeEx
> What could be done is
> 1. create a static method in the distribution class
> 2. have the "sample()" method call that one
+1. I like that the sample implementation for a distribution is in the
actual distribution class.
Denis
On 08/06/2012 02:30 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
[...]
The origin
On 8/5/12 5:30 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
[...]
The original code above illustrates the convenience of being able to
just make direct calls to randomData.nextXxx, which is why this
class exists ;)
>>> As I wrote in another post, I'm not against the convenience methods. But
>>> I
> >> [...]
> >> The original code above illustrates the convenience of being able to
> >> just make direct calls to randomData.nextXxx, which is why this
> >> class exists ;)
> > As I wrote in another post, I'm not against the convenience methods. But
> > IMO, they should be located in a new "Distr
On 8/5/12 3:49 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
>>> ---CUT---
>>> org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLarg
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:54:11PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
> > ---CUT---
> > org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLargeException: lower bound
> > (65) must be str
On 8/4/12 10:57 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
> ---CUT---
> org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLargeException: lower bound
> (65) must be strictly less than upper bound (65)
> at
> org.apache.commons.math3.dis
Hello.
Referring to this failed test (cf. messages from Continuum):
---CUT---
org.apache.commons.math3.exception.NumberIsTooLargeException: lower bound (65)
must be strictly less than upper bound (65)
at
org.apache.commons.math3.distribution.UniformIntegerDistribution.(UniformIntegerDist
20 matches
Mail list logo
