seriously, I would prefer the dependency as a good architectural
pattern. It encourages other people to use/contribute to it to avoid
repetitive work.
On 13-08-12 06:16 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
I am fine with it staying.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlie...@gmail.com> wrote:
So you are ok with apache-math dependency to stay?
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
wrote:
So I checked on these. The non-trivial issues with replacing Commons
Math
include:
- Poisson and negative binomial distributions. This would be several
hours
work to write and test (we have Colt-inherited negative binomial
distribution, but it takes no longer to write a new one than to test an
old
one).
- random number generators. This is about and hour or two of work to
pull
the MersenneTwister implementation into our code.
- next prime number finder. Not a big deal to replicate, but it would
take
a few hours to do.
- quadrature. We use an adaptive integration routine to check
distribution
properties. This, again, would take a few hours to replace.
I really don't see the benefit to this work.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
wrote:
2 distribution.PoissonDistribution;
2 distribution.PascalDistribution;
2 distribution.NormalDistribution;
1 util.FastMath;
1 random.RandomGenerator;
1 random.MersenneTwister;
1 primes.Primes;
1 linear.RealMatrix;
1 linear.EigenDecomposition;
1 linear.Array2DRowRealMatrix;
1 distribution.RealDistribution;
1 distribution.IntegerDistribution;
1 analysis.integration.UnivariateIntegrator;
1 analysis.integration.RombergIntegrator;
1 analysis.UnivariateFunction;
