> > I would encourage you, though, to add as much inline, class and > javadoc documentation as possible, since that is what developers > looking at the source will see immediately. > Yes, I had second thoughts on putting the notes in an external file... The main benefit being mathematical formatting... I guess something like alpha[k] instead of $\alpha_k$ would still be readable (and understandable), and could be inlined in the code. It's probably the best option. My worry is, as I said, the fact that in iteration k+1 of the loop, we compute gamma[k-1], but also alpha[k]... It's all a bit confusing, one has to be very careful about indices... Saunders did a marvelous job, and the code works brilliantly in Java now (passes all original tests by Saunders, plus additional ones, plus very large test-cases at work). However, it was written in a very linear fashion, with a rather large main loop. I've tried to break up the code in smaller pieces, factor out some duplicate code, reduce the scope of variables... But one still has to be *very* careful about these painful mixed indices... I do think that maintenance would benefit from additional notes, so I'll wait a while before I commit it.
FURTHER QUESTION: do you think that this reformatting of the code (plus renaming of some variables) could be offensive to the original developer? Should I be careful with that? His original contribution is fully aknowledged anyway. Sébastien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
