Hi, we already run some of the tests without the "scratchpad" dependency to verify that we don't introduce unwanted dependencies, see https://builds.apache.org/view/P/view/POI/job/POI-DSL-no-scratchpad/. It should be easy to do something similar for commons-math, i.e. exclude it during the test-run and exclude some specific tests that are known to depend on commons-math functionality.
Dominik. On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Javen O'Neal <javenon...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to Apache Commons Math. > > Can we write tests to verify that this dependency is only needed for > certain packages? I hope I'm wrong, but 20 MB is large enough that some > people may not want to update to newer versions of POI. > > On Jul 26, 2017 10:28 AM, "Greg Woolsey" <greg.wool...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We aren't averse to dependency changes, we did one in the past year. My > > personal preference is the Commons Math library, as it is also an Apache > > project and more importantly still under active development. JAMA > appears > > dead, and calls itself a straw-man implementation. > > > > We could note that if a user doesn't need Excel matrix function > evaluation > > they would not need to include that library at run time. Until we start > > using the Commons Math functionality for more stuff :) > > > > Actually, there are likely statistical functions we could implement using > > it as well, among others. > > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:18 AM Robert Hulbert <bob951...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Following up, there are two external Matrix Libraries that I am > familiar > > > with (JAMA and Commons.Math3.Linear). Both of these libraries provide > all > > > the functionality necessary to emulate the Excel Matrix functionality. > > The > > > Linear library is 2MB and JAMA is ~20KB. I understand this would be > > adding > > > a dependency to the project. Is there a preference on which library > would > > > be used or is the preferred solution to implement the functionality > > > directly in POI? > > > > > > On 2017-06-27 15:51 (-0700), "Javen O'Neal" <one...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Greg Woolsey has provided quite a few improvements on Table support > for > > > > XSSF recently (last 6-12 months). > > > > > > > > Question to the devs: Are tables part of the XLS binary file format, > > and > > > if > > > > so are users interested in a common SS Table interface? > > > > > > > > Question to Robert: Is LLNL particularly interested in using POI to > > read > > > > and write workbooks containing tables and matrix (table or array?) > > > > functions? Or were they more interested in having an intern help out > on > > > an > > > > open source project and table support was one idea they had? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 27, 2017 1:01 PM, "Hulbert, Robert Douglas" < > hulbe...@llnl.gov> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I'm a summer student at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and > was > > > > hired to find or implement POI's table formulas and matrix functions. > > > > > > > > Over the last week or so, I have checked the POI page/Contributor > > > > guidelines and have looked through the source code for handling this > > > > functionality. > > > > > > > > Is anyone still interested in this functionality? If not, is there > any > > > > documentation on where this aspect left off? > > > > > > > > Thank you so much for any help you can give! > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Robert Hulbert > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@poi.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@poi.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
