I disagree. lang.math exists for very simple, common maths operations. Min/max is a good example of this. It should be extended to all primitive types.
A little duplication here is OK. (Note that a year ago I wouldn't have written this, but it makes more sense to me now) Adding min(int[]) etc is also probably a good idea. It may be best to rename the methods to min and max to be compatable with [math] (deprecating as needed). On the boolean question, we have a BooleanUtils to add xor() to. Do you have a patch/test available? Stephen > from: Gary Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > If we want to be consistent, we could deprecate [lang]'s min/max and point > to [math]. This would parallel nicely with c.lang for java.lang and c.math > for java.math. It does not seem right to add all primitive types to > c.lang.NumberUtils if min/max routines are in c.math. > > Gary > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark R. Diggory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 15:18 > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] NumberUtils minimum, maximum, and xor > > Just to note: we have moved somwhat along these lines in the the commons > [math] sandbox component. Currently we have o.a.c.m.stat.StatUtils: > > double min(double[] doubleArr) > double max(double[] doubleArr) > > available there. > > -Mark Diggory > > _matthewHawthorne wrote: > > I have 2 observations: > > > > (1) Currently, the following methods are in o.a.c.l.NumberUtils > > > > int maximum(int a, int b, int c) > > long maximum(long a, long b, long c) > > int minimum(int a, int b, int c) > > long minimum(long a, long b, long c) > > > > I think it be more flexible to replace them with the following: > > > > int minimum(int[] intArr) > > int maximum(int[] intArr) > > long minimum(long[] longArr) > > long maximum(long[] longArr) > > > > It also may be a good time to add any missing methods such as: > > > > short minimum(short[] shortArr) > > short maximum(short[] shortArr) > > float minimum(float[] floatArr) > > float maximum(float[] floatArr) > > double minimum(double[] doubleArr) > > double maximum(double[] doubleArr) > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > (2) After searching for an easy way to xor booleans, and not finding > > anything, I created a method: > > > > boolean xor(boolean[] boolArr) > > > > Would this be a good addition to NumberUtils? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
