Le 22/10/2011 08:41, Sébastien Brisard a écrit :
> Hello,
Hi Sébastien,
> 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
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,
2011/10/8 Sébastien Brisard
> FURTHER QUESTION: do you think that this reformatting of the code
> (plus renaming of some variables) could be offensive to the original
> developer? Should I be careful with that? His original contribution is
> fully aknowledged anyway.
>
I have never seen an insta
On 10/8/11 9:20 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>> I would encourage you, though, to add as much inline, class and
>> javadoc documentation as possible, since that is what developers
>> looking at the source will see immediately.
>>
> Yes, I had second thoughts on putting the notes in an external file
>
> I would encourage you, though, to add as much inline, class and
> javadoc documentation as possible, since that is what developers
> looking at the source will see immediately.
>
Yes, I had second thoughts on putting the notes in an external file...
The main benefit being mathematical formattin
On 10/8/11 7:44 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> I've spent quite a lot of time going through Pr. Saunders' FORTRAN
> implementation of this algorithm, and the Java port is almost ready.
> This algorithm is quite difficult to read, because some quantities
> required at iteration k can be comput
Hi,
I've spent quite a lot of time going through Pr. Saunders' FORTRAN
implementation of this algorithm, and the Java port is almost ready.
This algorithm is quite difficult to read, because some quantities
required at iteration k can be computed only in iteration (k+1). So
one must be careful in m
