Re: [ROOT] FUMILI C++ code

From: Rene Brun (Rene.Brun@cern.ch)
Date: Thu Apr 17 2003 - 13:51:35 MEST


Hi Stanislav,

It is always difficult to design an abstract interface when there is only one
implementation. The current interface was strongly influenced by Minuit.
Let's see if you make a Fumili interface. We can always extend this interface.
The adbantage of the current abstract interface (driven by keywords/messges)
is that one can always interface ExecuteCommand with any system without
adding new functions.

Rene Brun

Stanislav Nesterov wrote:
> 
>    Hi Rene,
>    I agree it is straitforward but required some time.
>    Anyway thanks for these answers.
>    I know it is too late already but I think it would be more preferable
> to make procedure interface for TVirtualFitter, not by ExecuteCommand.
> I spent a lot of time to figure out, that I should implement all commands
> of ExecuteCommand to make other fitter in ROOT. May be it is worth to
> include in TVirtualFitter or TFitter class documentation?
> 
>                 Best regards,
>                                         Stanislav.
> 
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Rene Brun wrote:
> 
> > Stanislav,
> >
> > I had an interface between HBOOK and FUMILI running many years ago.
> > As far as I remember, it should be straightforward to make an implementation
> > of TVirtualFitter::ExecuteCommand calling the Fumili functions.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:50:10 MET