Ted Dunning a écrit :
> I think that packages are nice and all, but commons.math is pretty
> aggressive about balkanizing the name space.
>
> +1 for merging.
Since nobody voiced against the merging, I'm going to merge
decomposition back to the linear package as suggested by Sam, thus
reverting th
I think that packages are nice and all, but commons.math is pretty
aggressive about balkanizing the name space.
+1 for merging.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Sam Halliday wrote:
> I recommend that the decompositions package be simply merged into the
> linear
> package.
>
--
Ted Dunning, C
Sam Halliday a écrit :
> Dear all,
>
> The decompositions in the linear package have been given their own
> package... I'm just flagging up a concern (prior to the release of the API
> for 2.0) that this might make things tricky in the future. The current
> implementations of the decompositions ar
-toolkits-java and to the best of
my knowledge, nobody has complained about that structure for any reason.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/commons-math-linear.decomposition-for-2.0-tp23776424p23776424.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing l
