On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:09:26 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Quoting Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I am tempted to make one more API change; but am ambivalent about it: > > Currently the API for (non-paired) TTests uses a boolean flag to > indicate > > whether or not the test is being performed under the hypothesis of > equal > > subpopulation variances (homoscedastic test). Recently, [lang] added > a > > development guideline to avoid boolean flags in APIs. I thought > about > > splitting the homoscedastic tests out (as I did the paired tests); > but > > decided not to (partly because of the long name and proliferation of > > methods). Does anyone feel strongly that this should be changed? > > > > Why avoid returning boolean flags? They are as much part of the Java > API as > anything else? I whish I had my usuall mail application, I'd search > and review > the discussion. Can you post briefly why [lang] decided this? I'm not > convinced yet that its a necessity, the API can be changed in future > versions. > > -Mark >
Returning booleans is not the issue. It's the passing of boolean arguments to handle control flow inside methods. [lang] decided against boolean arguments in favor of two methods. One for each of the control paths. I for one, would prefer this same approach of dropping the boolean argument and replace it with sepearate methods. Do I feel strongly about this, as Phils asks? No, as Marks suggests, these methods could be added later. Brent Worden --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
