On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> Your reading and mine are a bit different. Stephen Colebourne wanted > Fraction kept in Commons Lang as he felt users would find more value in it > there because Commons Math is too specialized. I read Gary’s comment as a > rebuttal to the person who said Fraction was “foundational” for Commons > Math. No one ever suggested Fraction deserved to be its own project. > > After looking at both Lang and Math my feeling is that Fraction is simply > too small to warrant being a project on its own. Does what is in Commons > Math really provide any value over what is in Commons Lang? If so, perhaps > the Fraction support in Commons Lang should just be enhanced. > >From my Smalltalk days, I fondly recall Smalltalk's Fraction [1] being a basic object like Integer, very cool. So yeah, it could happily live as a first class citizen in Commons Lang AFAIC. But what I do not want to decide when I am coding up an app, is which Fraction to use, the one from Commons Foo, Commons Bar or FooBar. I want one well maintained class I can rely on. [1] https://chara.cs.illinois.edu/sites/cs528/files/arithmetic-and-double-dispatching-in-smalltalk-80.pdf Gary > > Ralph > > > On Jun 27, 2016, at 3:51 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:34:47 -0500, Brent Worden wrote: > >> One previous thread on the subject: > >> http://markmail.org/message/u7lcxd6ye6qnesku < > http://markmail.org/message/u7lcxd6ye6qnesku> > > > > The final sentence of that thread: > > "So I do not see Fraction as the foundation for anything really. > > It stands on its own nicely IMO." > > > > What more adequate conclusion would be than to have a standalone > > Commons component? > > > > [And the majority of the thread participants seemed to agree. > > Yet the inertia prevailed.] > > > > Gilles > > > >> Brent > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Brent Worden <brent.wor...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Somewhere in the mailing list archives is a discussion around this very > >>> topic. It was quite some time ago so I do not recall the reasoning for > >>> keeping both at that time. I will try sifting through the archives to > find > >>> the thread if I find time. > >>> > >>> > >>> Brent > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Ralph Goers < > ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Jun 27, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Jochen Wiedmann < > >>>> jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Gilles < > gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >> Is it a complete overlap with what is in CM's package > >>>> >> "o.a.c.m.fraction"? > >>>> >> Should one be dropped in favour of the other? > >>>> > > >>>> > *Can* we drop either, while maintaining BC? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Why wouldn’t you be able to. The user would be able to continue using > the > >>>> old version if the need it. > >>>> > >>>> Ralph > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org <mailto: > dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org <mailto: > dev-h...@commons.apache.org> > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
