Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(643)

Issue 207098: Pareto rng constructors using scale and shape instead of mean and shape (Closed)

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
11 years, 1 month ago by Tommaso Pecorella
Modified:
11 years, 1 month ago
CC:
ns-3-reviews_googlegroups.com
Visibility:
Public.

Description

Bug 817, http://www.nsnam.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=817

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 5
Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+87 lines, -17 lines) Patch
M src/core/random-variable.h View 3 chunks +29 lines, -5 lines 3 comments Download
M src/core/random-variable.cc View 7 chunks +58 lines, -12 lines 2 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 7
Tommaso Pecorella
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-02-15 17:54:45 UTC) #1
Tommaso Pecorella
http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/3 File src/core/random-variable.h (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/3#newcode401 src/core/random-variable.h:401: * \param params the two parameters, respectively shape and ...
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-02-16 01:51:53 UTC) #2
Mathieu Lacage
http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/3 File src/core/random-variable.h (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/3#newcode417 src/core/random-variable.h:417: ParetoVariable (std::pair<double, double> params, double b); I understand why ...
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-02-16 15:58:21 UTC) #3
Tommaso Pecorella
I agree. Tom suggested to use pair<>, and seems reasonable, as doing so we don't ...
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-02-18 01:12:36 UTC) #4
Tommaso Pecorella
http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/2 File src/core/random-variable.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/diff/1/2#newcode657 src/core/random-variable.cc:657: * \param params the two parameters, respectively shape and ...
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-02-18 01:12:47 UTC) #5
Josh Pelkey
On 2010/02/18 01:12:36, Tommaso Pecorella wrote: > I agree. Tom suggested to use pair<>, and ...
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-03-01 20:58:41 UTC) #6
Tommaso Pecorella
11 years, 1 month ago (2010-03-01 23:46:24 UTC) #7
Aye,

merging tonight

Tommaso


On 01/mar/2010, at 21.58, joshpelkey@gmail.com wrote:

> On 2010/02/18 01:12:36, Tommaso Pecorella wrote:
>> I agree. Tom suggested to use pair<>, and seems reasonable, as doing
> so we don't
>> need one more class just to add a different constructor.
> 
>> Anyway, either solution works and it's fine for me, let's just decide
> which one
>> is to be implemented.
> 
> Tommaso,
> 
> It looks like you get to decide which solution to take.  Are you happy
> with this one?  If so +1 for merge from me.
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/207098/show

Sign in to reply to this message.

Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b