Hi > > It thus becomes urgent to tackle the remaining blocking issues. > Can we please make a list of those, and of all practical matters that > prevent the preparation of the release? >
MATH-731 is pretty much solved, but I still need a piece of advice. Let me explain : the triangular distribution is so simple that explicit formula have been implemented for inverseCumulativeProbability(double) (see below). {code} public double inverseCumulativeProbability(double p) throws OutOfRangeException { if (p < 0.0 || p > 1.0) { throw new OutOfRangeException(p, 0, 1); } if (p == 0.0) { return a; } if (p == 1.0) { return b; } final double pc = (c - a) / (b - a); if (p == pc) { return c; } if (p < pc) { return a + FastMath.sqrt(p * (b - a) * (c - a)); } return b - FastMath.sqrt((1 - p) * (b - a) * (b - c)); } {code} My problem is that I do not know what getSolverAbsoluteAccuracy() should return. I see three options 1. Have getSolverAbsoluteAccuracy() throw an UnsupportedOperationException, as the solver is *never* invoked. 2. Return a default value, and specify in the Javadoc that it is meaningless or not really meaningful ;). 3. Return an estimate of the absolute accuracy of the explicit above expressions, namely a + FastMath.sqrt(p * (b - a) * (c - a)) and b - FastMath.sqrt((1 - p) * (b - a) * (b - c)). My preferred option is 1. I dislike option 2, because users might actually be using the returned value, believing it to somehow reflect the accuracy of the value returned by inverseCumulativeProbability(double). Option 3 would be a good compromise, but I certainly do not have the level of expertise to come up with this estimate... Any help would be most welcome! What do you think? Sébastien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org