Hi Troels, If you are happy with the current state of the trunk and you don't plan on too many more changes for now, just say so and I'll tag relax 3.3.5 (after a bit of testing on different 32 and 64-bit Linux, Mac, and Windows test machines).
Cheers, Edward On 15 January 2015 at 11:09, Edward d'Auvergne <edw...@nmr-relax.com> wrote: >> Well, the error I found is fixed. > > Great! The pseudo-solution I suggested didn't work so well, but the > new test is passing with your code. I just wasn't sure if it was a > complete solution as the bug report is still open > (https://gna.org/bugs/?23186). > > >> Maybe there is a need, to also test for 2 field data. > > That might be useful for sanity purposes, just to make sure relax is > behaving correctly for all dispersion parameter categories. > > >> The code ordinary_least_squares() is not used yet, as I still going back and >> forth about argumentation for which one to use. >> Depending on the statistic book I read, I change my meaning. > > Maybe just dump both side-by-side in a new relax library module (i.e. > restore the old one that was deleted). Then you could compare > performance. The differences are often due to edge cases, which in > this case may not even be an issue. Note that statistics books, and > statisticians themselves, have strong opinions and biases based on > their speciality. So you need to be objective and test for yourself. > So if you dump both into the library, you can use them as you wish, or > forget about them. You work on the auto-analysis will then be > decoupled from this code, as the linear regression code will be > separated, isolated, independent, and fixed. This is the entire > purpose of the library and why I created it :) (see > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.science.nmr.relax.devel/3789). > > If a function can operate by itself, having only simple data input and > output and is not reliant on the relax data store, then the aim should > be to shift it into the library to isolate it. This has the effect of > simplifying the auto-analyses by minimising the amount of code there. > It also simplifies the pipe_control package, as these modules should > only check arguments and manipulate the relax data store. Migration > of functions to the library is still an ongoing process, but already > since relax 3.0.0 (http://wiki.nmr-relax.com/Relax_3.0.0) the > auto_analyses, data_store, pipe_control, prompt, specific_analyses, > and target_functions packages have been hugely simplified. This > decoupling is also a great aid for the debugging process due to the > isolation and code simplification. > > Cheers, > > Edward _______________________________________________ relax (http://www.nmr-relax.com) This is the relax-devel mailing list relax-devel@gna.org To unsubscribe from this list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, visit the list information page at https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/relax-devel
