Hello. > > [...] > > I have raised PR #113 after rebasing to the master branch with Alex's > > checkstyle changes > > > > As per feedback, I have made the following changes > > a) Added javadoc comments > > b) Ensured test coverage > > c) Renamed accessors on the interface > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > In "DComplex", I propose that the accessors be named "real()" and > > > "imag()" (or just > > > "re()" and "im()"). ["DComplex" is not a very satisfying name either...] > > > > For the interface name, shall I change it to Complex64 from DComplex? > > > > In c the 'complex' keyword is a suffix: > > double complex c1; > float complex c2; > long double complex c3; > > In c++ the type is generic (and read as a suffix): > > complex<double> c1; > complex<float> c2; > > Either of these would be my preference over DComplex or Complex64.
Just to be sure: Are we discussing this because "Complex" is already taken? > > > Are we sure that all this code needs to be part of the public API? > > > If not, I'd suggest limiting accessibility to "package-private". > > > > Are you referring to the static methods in ComplexFunctions and > > ComplexBiFunctions classes? > > I think they would need to be public for developers to be able to compose > > multiple operations... > > > > The static helper functions have been extracted to support all the ISO c99 > operations on the list structure of complex numbers. > > A list will ideally implement a generic foreach operation. So to apply a > single function only requires making the static functions public. The > alternative is to make the list expose all the ISO c99 operations in its > public API. > > To create a composite function that eventually writes back to the list can > be implemented by writing intermediate values to a result which is then > passed to the next operation. This can be satisfied by using the Complex > class. This already exposes all the ISO c99 functions. So perhaps it is not > required to make all the helper functions public for the purpose of > composing multiple operations. But it would be helpful for all the single > operations. > I may be one or more steps behind, sorry, but I still cannot figure out how the API is supposed to be applied (IOW, the "use cases"). I'm still at "provide functions that operate on a list of complex numbers". But the subsequent question: For what purpose? Some weeks ago (IIRC), I asked the same and whether the only use case was FFT... Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
