Not really.
It can check first. That doesn't take long.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Gilles Sadowski <
gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> Alternatively we could call this utility function from within the
> constructor (and in the "evaluate" method), in all cases, in order to make
> sure
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 01:46:07PM -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
> This seems like asking for trouble.
>
> Usually interpolation requires O(n) work since lots of points are going to
> be interpolated. Adding the O(n) task of checking for sorted data
> to the constructor seems like a better idea than
This seems like asking for trouble.
Usually interpolation requires O(n) work since lots of points are going to
be interpolated. Adding the O(n) task of checking for sorted data
to the constructor seems like a better idea than adding a flag. The O(n log
n) cost of sorting would only be triggered
Le 31/10/2010 17:59, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 03:57:33PM +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Le 31/10/2010 15:08, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> [Continued from the previous message.]
>>>
>>> Accepting that the interpolation abscissae are not sorted in strictly
>>>
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 03:57:33PM +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 31/10/2010 15:08, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> > Hi.
> >
> > [Continued from the previous message.]
> >
> > Accepting that the interpolation abscissae are not sorted in strictly
> > increasing order make it necessary to check (at
Le 31/10/2010 15:08, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> Hi.
>
> [Continued from the previous message.]
>
> Accepting that the interpolation abscissae are not sorted in strictly
> increasing order make it necessary to check (at every call to the "value"
> method) that no 2 interpolating points are the sa
Hi.
[Continued from the previous message.]
Accepting that the interpolation abscissae are not sorted in strictly
increasing order make it necessary to check (at every call to the "value"
method) that no 2 interpolating points are the same.
The code would be cleaner is we assume (as a pre-conditio
Hi.
In the class "PolynomialFunctionLagrangeForm", why is the check for
identical abscissae deferred to the "evaluate" or "computeCoefficients"
methods?
Gilles
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For ad
