|Re: [eigen] Bug in traspose|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Bug in traspose
- From: "Schleimer, Ben" <bensch128@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:19:19 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=YSlbvxFtHx3/Vm0lP1wMF1ULKDfurU2loXulpA6alS4uvAJdCsKLXdjqXNub+azWfc932setLdyCfO0RKTD5CQwwMs14+sXfAfWVWk5MdwfZ91hMOG65mQ4pb/+kPpqAU01AKGHNtkc2Hm2ybtqEazPuItJQVVqOS45bVO+WKfY=;
> > I was thinking more about using va_args inside the operator()(...).
> > Then , can be overloaded to go to the next row.
> Oh I see. I have not much experience with va_args and wondered if that was
> considered a clean practice in c++ (and a quick google search suggests it
> is "not considered typesafe" and is "generally avoided in c++").
Oh, that's too bad. Well I thought it was a good idea. I guess the whole type safety thing will
pretty much sink it though.