The CubicSplineFunction is the only place, that I'm aware of, that truly implements these methods. Also, these method are never called anywhere in the code, save the unit tests. This includes calls through either the interface or the concrete classes.
As I see it we have three choices: 1) let it as is 2) add a differentiable interface per Mike's suggestion. 3) remove the derivative methods from the interface and keep them only on CubicSplineFunction. In order of preference, I choose 2, 1, 3. On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:02:46 -0500, "Mark R. Diggory" wrote: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>What is the purpose for having the firstDerivative() and > >>secondDerivative() methods on a UnivariateRealFunction ? > > > > > > One of the interpolating routines use the first and second > derivatives. > > > > > >>It is a little troubling to me to have at this level (perhaps if > >>needed a subclass such as UnivariateDifferentiableRealFunction ). > > > > > > This might be a good idea. When I used the solvers to evaluate the > > inverse cumulative distribution functions, I found the > > UnivariateRealFunction interface a bit cumbersome for my needs. > > > > Some methods do not neccessarily need to be exposed via an interface > if > they are used internally. While some UnivariateRealFunction > implementations may require this capability, is it required to be in > the > interface? > > -Mark > > -- > Mark Diggory > Software Developer > Harvard MIT Data Center > http://osprey.hmdc.harvard.edu > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brent Worden http://www.brent.worden.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
