On 6 December 2010 22:21, Gilles Sadowski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > - * @deprecated in 2.2 (to be removed in 3.0). Please use >> >> > - * {...@link #map(UnivariateRealFunction)} directly with >> >> > - * the function classes in package >> >> > - * {...@link org.apache.commons.math.analysis.function}. >> >> > + * @deprecated in 2.2 (to be removed in 3.0). >> >> >> >> Why not leave the reference to #map(UnivariateRealFunction) ? >> > >> > Because the package "function" does not exist in MATH_2_X. >> >> I know that, but #map(UnivariateRealFunction) does exist (in the same >> source file). >> >> It was only the reference to the package name that was wrong. >> >> If the replacement for the deprecated methods is not >> #map(UnivariateRealFunction), then whatever is the replacement should >> be specified in the Javadoc. > > The replacement is the method "map" (which exists) together with the > appropriate function (which doesn't, unless someone wants to backport the > "function" package).
There are several implementations of UnivariateRealFunction, e.g. PolynomialFunctionLagrangeForm. Are these not suitable as parameters to the map method? > I think that we agreed with Phil that when the replacement doesn't exist, it > is sufficient to warn the users with a terse deprecation message. I don't think it is right to leave the user totally in the dark as to how to resolve the deprecation warnings. > > Regards, > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
