> [...]
> >>
> >> ---CUT---
> >> double[] a = new double[] {1, 2, 3};
> >> double[] b = new double[] {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
> >> Percentile pA = new Percentile(a);
> >> Percentile pB = new Percentile(b);
> >>
> >> double r;
> >> r = pA.evaluate(50);
> >> r = pB.evaluate(50);
> >> r = pA.evaluate(50);
> >> r = pB.evaluate(50);
> >> ---CUT---
> >>
> >> That way, later calls can benefit from whatever preprocessing was done in
> >> previous calls.
> >> The instance will always control all the information needed (e.g. after a
> >> call to an "addValues" method) for the processing without the need to rely
> >> on the user for calling "clearCache" whenever necessary.
> >>
> >>
> >> Gilles
> >
> > +1
> > I think that is a really good idea and I agree on the points made.
>
> This proposal is point 4. It breaks the UnivariateStatistic API and it
> breaks what the user found interesting in this API, i.e. have a general
> statistics framework where one statistic can be replaced by another one.
>
> If you read again one of my earlier messages from today, we will combine
> this method (i.e. evaluate without values) and the UnivariateStatistics API.
>
> Perhaps we could add these new methods (i.e. addValues and evaluate
> without values) to UnivariateStatistics, but this can only be done on 3.0.
+1
Is it urgent to complicate the code? If the API conflicts with a necessary
efficiency improvement, why not postpone the change?
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
