[SciPy-dev] scipy.optimize.nonlin rewrite

Ondrej Certik ondrej@certik...
Mon Dec 8 12:42:29 CST 2008

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Pauli Virtanen <pav@iki.fi> wrote:
> Hi Ondrej,
> Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:43:47 +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> First let me apologize for taking me so long to reply. I wrote this code
>> in the first place and I am happy that Pauli has rewritten it. I agree
>> with the general direction, but I think this change should not go into
>> 0.7.0, as it changes the interface and it is not well tested yet.
>> Also, you renamed all the working broyden implementations that I use as
>> BadBroyden, so I suggest to name them GoodBroyden, more below.
> Quick comment (I'll post a more thorough reply later on). The "good" and
> "bad" Broyden's method are names referring to specific ways to update the
> Jacobian (at least these were the names I learned here in a univ.
> course), cf. also [1]; they do not really refer to goodness or badness of
> the methods, and definitely not to quality of implementation. (If you
> meant I had mislabeled one of these, please correct me.)
> .. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broyden%27s_method

Ah, ok ---  that wiki didn't exist yet when I wrote this. I only knew
first Broyden method and a second Broyden method. Well, still I think
it's weird to call something that works well by BadBrodyen, but if
that's what people are used to, then ok. Do you have some good
reference of this, besides wiki?

And in any case, all of this should be explained in the docstrings.


More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list