Hehehe, thats a novel idea. Ok to be devils advocate...

Your coming at this from "one jar" perspective. Which leads me to wonder why having math be "one jar" is important to you? Can you please elaborate on this?

And to the rest of the community I postulate: Is this a critical usage case?

The commons libraries are planned/designed to be used together. So we make great gains in removing replicated effort by using them when the proper situation provides itself. Key word here "proper". Because in the long run, the circular dependency issues and usage of our math component also becomes critical to any group who doesn't wish to drag along a bunch of dependencies, and this may very well occur, even with another commons project using our library. So I'll go through and try to make some appropriate comments below.

Kasper Nielsen wrote:
Hi gang,

I love commons-math, one problem though!

lets take a look at the dependecies

common-lang: 189 kb
commons-beanutils: 116 kb
commons-collections-SNAPSHOT.jar 463
commons-discovery 70 kb
commons-logging-1.0.3.jar 31 kb kb

Thats 850 kb!!! of 3rd party libraries that are only used in a few places.
So to calculate a simple mean I need to include around 6 jars (including commons-math)


So lets get the list down a bit.

* Commons-lang
Getting rid of Commons-lang is pretty easy since it is only used in one place: MathException
Solution : Let MathException extend Exception instead of NestableException. There aren't really anywhere we use the ability to nest Exceptions inside other Exceptions in commons-math.


Really, I'm not so sure I really like NestableException now that I look at it. It just adds a whole bunch of complexity to the simple and integral idea that something throws an exception and you catch it. I'm not sure, but I think the idea of throwing the same exception object multiple times is just horrid. I wouldn't mind seeing it go away from our Exceptions. Others may think otherwise...


* Commons-collections
Getting rid of commons-collections is also pretty easy
Solution: Getting a copy of HashBag (and the Testcase) and put into math.util (no need to copy the interface)



Not so sure I'm into moving classes out of other commons projects and adding them to ours. HashBag is a fairly generic and useful class, chances are that if your using commons-math you'll probably also want to be using commons-collections.



now we got rid of ~ 650 kb in around 2 minutes, 3 jars left, this is a fun game!!

* Commons-Beanutils
Okay the transformers are nice but come on how many people are going to use them?
Solution: put them into a new small library: commons-math-transformers.jar



I'm thinking it would be just as easy to directly use the reflection api in our case.



** Commons-Discovery
KISS keep it simple stupid, who on earth is going to provide there own UnivariateRealSolverFactory??
and for those few people that need it... I think they are smart enough to do figure it out themself.
Solution: remove it (or do something like we do for commons-logging)



Its also used to discover new distribution factories under o.a.m.stat.distributions Its interesting, I guess I don't understand what "discovery" really adds, as a feature, on top of Java's own Service Provider discovery? Anyways, is a pretty small library, I'm less inclined to chuck it because of the "bloat" issue.




** Commons-logging
Lastly commons-logging...
I would think returning NaN is enough, but okay if people insist we can do something like (pseudo code)


public class logutil
   static Method logMethod;
    static {
        try
        {
            Class clazz = Class.forName("commons.LogFactory");
            logMethod = clazz.getMethod("error");
        }
        catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {}
    }
    public static logError(String msg, Throwable t)
    {
        if (logMethod!=null)
        {
            logMethod.invoke(msg + t);
        }
    }
}

Logging is a damn good thing to do in a standardized way, commons logging really provides a solid transitional api between commons tools and other logging api's. Its tiny, I'm not sure I think it's a great idea to replace it with custom code.


The above code scares me because reflection always adds a "layer" of complexity to stack traces and this type of approach makes it harder to interpret the logging and errors.



and whoops we have now gotten rid of all the libraries, and we have easy embeddable little commons math jar.


regards
  Kasper

--------
Kasper Nielsen
kaspern at apache.org


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to