Posted by Steve on February 29, 2000 at 15:28:29:
I have found two approaches to porting MLC++ to MLJ
(ID3 only). One is to use a cookbook style of converting
C++ code to Java and then examine those things which
don't convert nicely, like C++ consts and enumeration
types. Or, re-invent the code in Java style and line
by line determine whether or not to abandon implementation
choices made by the C++ programmer and adopt more java-esque
implementation styles. Both are tedious, time-consuming tasks
for the size of MLC++. For instance, just reading the
data file, which I am working on now, requires multiple
classes and many of these implementation choices I mentioned
before.
Another question I have is this. Do we really want to
port MLC++ ? Would it be better for D2K to reevaluate the
requirements for our ID3 implementation and then
reimplement it based on those requirements instead of
first reinventing MLC++ version into java and then
pushing that through some changes for D2k?
Just some thoughts as I am begining the pour line by line
through MLC++.