--- "Mark R. Diggory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Al Chou wrote: > > > > OK, I see. The one thing I notice is that the names are getting awfully > long, > > especially for the non-default case. I guess that's a price we pay for > having > > descriptive (no play on words intended) names like > DescriptiveStatistics.... > > Maybe the Implementations could be abbreviated somewhat > > o.a.c.math.stat.DescriptiveStatistics > > o.a.c.math.stat.StorelessDscrStatsImpl > o.a.c.math.stat.DscrStatsImpl > > We could also consider pushing the actual implementation off into its > own packages > > o.a.c.math.stat.impl.StorelessDscrStatsImpl > o.a.c.math.stat.impl.DscrStatsImpl > > This would even push all the univariate stat providers off into this > hierarchy as well > > o.a.c.math.stat.impl.univar.StorelessUnivariateStatistic > o.a.c.math.stat.impl.univar.UnivariateStatistic
Too much renaming and reorganization. I didn't mean to complain too loudly, and if the result is to use abbreviations, I retract my comments. I probably should have given more than half a second's thought to what alternative names might be shorter, but in the absence of well-thought-out shorter names, I much prefer the current proposal of DescriptiveStatistics. Never use abbreviations unless everyone already knows them (e.g., sin for sine), I say. Al __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
