From: Zach Laine (whatwasthataddress_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-11 15:22:25
On 8/10/07, Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Discretization for the other series types is not useless. For sparse,
> for example, it enforces that samples may only exist at offsets that are
> a multiple of the discretization.
I was reading the rest of your email and having a hard time understand
how we were talking past each other so completely. Here is where I
could first figure out how we'd gotten out of phase. I was operating
under the impression that sparse series could have values at arbitrary
offsets (not integer multiples of the discretization). It was this
misunderstanding on my part that lead to my suggestion to remove
discretization from some types. Consider it withdrawn. Though you're
probably sick of hearing this, the use of discretization should be
spelled out more explicitly in the documentation to make this clear.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk