On 06/03/2013 04:10 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 6/3/13 4:18 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> to start working on the Monte Carlo engine (see MATH-463) I would like to
>> break this thing up in multiple pieces. One thing that could be added
>> independently is the concept of a stochastic process (e.g. Wiener,
>> BrownianMotion, ...).
>
> +1
>>
>> The code in the contribution is already a pretty good start, but the
>> question would be where to put it. We do not yet have a stochastic base
>> package, and random is also not such a good fit imho.
>>
>> I see various options:
>>
>> - random.process: well it models a random process ...
>
> random was originally intended to just house random data generation
> stuff. I would see stochastic processes as logical clients of the
> generators in random, but I see the logic here.
>> - stochastic.process: downside of adding another top-level package
>
> It think this is probably the best. I tend to favor shallow and
> wide over deep and narrow because it makes it easier to find things
> and leads to less head-scratching about why things are where they
> are. What are the other stochastic.x that you have in mind?
I would also prefer this, but currently I do not have a clear idea of
other packages that would reside beneath stochastic.
>> - stat.process: well, statistics is a sub-group of stochastic so it would
>> not be perfect
>
> He he. A probabilist, I assume :) What you probably really mean is
> probability.stochastic.process, probability.stat.*. Too deep for me :)
yes, I would not propose something like that ;-).
Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org