[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-163?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17363317#comment-17363317
]
Matt Juntunen commented on NUMBERS-163:
---------------------------------------
Ok, I think I see what you're doing here. We don't need the accumulator class
because {{LinearCombination}} can be the accumulator itself. A few questions on
the API:
- Are you picturing {{LinearCombination}} being mutable?
- If we go this route with {{LinearCombination}}, would it make sense to try
something similar with {{Norm}} for consistency?
> Summation and LinearCombination Accumulators
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NUMBERS-163
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUMBERS-163
> Project: Commons Numbers
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Matt Juntunen
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> It would be useful to have simple accumulator classes in {{Summation}} and
> {{LinearCombination}} to perform extended precision operations on arbitrary
> collections of values without requiring conversion to {{double[]}}. Ex:
> {code:java}
> Summation.Accumulator sum= Summation.accumulator(1d);
> sum.add(x)
> .add(y)
> .add(z)
> .add(w);
> double sumResult = sum.get();
> LinearCombination.Accumulator comb = LinearCombination.accumulator(1d);
> comb.add(x, scale)
> .add(y, scale)
> .add(z, scale)
> .add(w, scale);
> double combResult = comb.get();
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
