On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com> wrote: > VectorWritable currently is a proper decorator, right? It doesn't even > implement Vector at all.
Yeah, the other *Writable classes should be as well. NamedVector should both be a Vector and decorate a Vector too. Its Writable also decorates a NamedVector. > > What exactly are you suggesting the hierarchy to be? > > 1) Vector is an interface, NamedVector extends it (I just have NamedVector as a concrete subclass, a decorator) > 2) DenseVectorWritable implements Writable, does not implement Vector > 3) ditto for *AccessSparseVector Yes > 4) VectorWritable acts still just as it is now, basically Yes, made it more general so we don't have to modify it to handle each new Vector impl too. > > In looking over the code, I noticed that both of the SparseVectors are > inefficient in their read()'ing, in that they are basically building up the > vectors from scratch, which is silly, esp. in the case of the > SequentialAccessSparseVector, which should be just reading in > the int[] and double[] and constructing the OrderedIntDoubleMapping > straight from that. Waaaay faster. Agree, this is one of many things we could tweak.
