Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Gilles Sadowski
> > [...] > > If you don't hear from them, maybe it is because you are the only user > > (which should probably tell you something of how "broadly" useful the > > functionality is)... > > > > Personally, I have _zero_ stake in this issue because I don't use > > "RandomDataImpl"[1]. > > Then pl

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Phil Steitz
On Nov 6, 2011, at 2:50 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >> [...] >>> 1. Luc "was happy removing all the stuff". >>> 2. Sebb was inclined to make the field final. >>> 3. I agree with both. >>> That's three to one, if I count correctly. >>> >>> I don't have a big problem with keeping the functiona

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Gilles Sadowski
> [...] > > 1. Luc "was happy removing all the stuff". > > 2. Sebb was inclined to make the field final. > > 3. I agree with both. > > That's three to one, if I count correctly. > > > > I don't have a big problem with keeping the functionality, if you insist on > > that point. > > I just suggested

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/6/11 10:20 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 09:27:44AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 11/6/11 5:44 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 11:03:40PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: On 11/5/11 6:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 09:27:44AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/6/11 5:44 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 11:03:40PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> On 11/5/11 6:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > >>> On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/6/11 5:44 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 11:03:40PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 11/5/11 6:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: On 11/5/11 7:04 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Stei

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-06 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 11:03:40PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/5/11 6:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> On 11/5/11 7:04 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > >>> Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Steitz a écrit : > The comments in MATH-701 i

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/5/11 6:50 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 12:29:15AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for >> refactoring RandomDataImpl. >> >> 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization of the non-secure and secure >> generators. Have the

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/5/11 6:38 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 11/5/11 7:04 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: >>> Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Steitz a écrit : The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for refactoring RandomDataImpl. >>

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 12:29:15AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for > refactoring RandomDataImpl. > > 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization of the non-secure and secure > generators. Have the constructor initialize the generators > instead.

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Gilles Sadowski
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 11/5/11 7:04 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > > Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Steitz a écrit : > >> The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for > >> refactoring RandomDataImpl. > >> > >> 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization o

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/5/11 7:04 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Steitz a écrit : >> The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for >> refactoring RandomDataImpl. >> >> 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization of the non-secure and secure >> generators. Have the constructor initiali

Re: [math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 05/11/2011 08:29, Phil Steitz a écrit : > The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for > refactoring RandomDataImpl. > > 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization of the non-secure and secure > generators. Have the constructor initialize the generators > instead. I am fine with th

[math] RandomDataImpl refactoring

2011-11-05 Thread Phil Steitz
The comments in MATH-701 included a couple of suggestions for refactoring RandomDataImpl. 1) Eliminate the lazy initialization of the non-secure and secure generators. Have the constructor initialize the generators instead. I am fine with this for the non-secure generator, but initializing a sec