| Re: [eigen] Matrix assignment |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Matrix assignment
- From: "Gael Guennebaud" <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:44:12 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=qYuwB7Nr7spAG/taopU8fk5hOTKEOMlR49G50X8FQv8=; b=SUSwVK62f2braUv/i6RYWUvRE+E3vw6OeoXkbIyvtt3AJRq7pHW/8WwT1uFujlVv0k ltiN2zAJi2E8ONmrZgMU1ExjWIeZa7LxyNCYWk0FAIpi2aUyZJSM/iuMuept/Iufawfb A8NWSDbSFfqCeuGvd727Mpb6sPFe3zdNXNV94=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=mQJpVmRewsSl3u/yRGeEXyC635jGa12fG1IBWeJ8DHbAU+H1hKNbm6o+b754uFptXn EOEyF0QUMzsQhw/VxT6486EhQ8WfAj5ULUTrtivbXwTUlWm9ceKojUmFTeWtErh60H+H gmNJR9wGXtTPN0jjOKX55xpmhq6zSQrT394hg=
this one is done:
SVN commit 875595 by ggael:
As discussed on ML:
* remove the automatic resizing feature of operator =
* add function Matrix::set() to be used when the previous behavior is wanted
* the default constructor of dynamic-size matrices now creates a
"null" matrix (data=0, rows = cols = 0) instead of a 1x1 matrix
* fix UnixX typos ;)
cheers,
gael.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Gael Guennebaud
<gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Benoît Jacob <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Pretty good idea!
>>
>> We'll just need to make clear in the docs: "if you use the default Matrix()
>> constructor for a dynamic-size matrix, then you need to set() this matrix
>> before doing anything else with it".
>>
>> Seems reasonable to me, and i like the idea of avoiding all that overhead in
>> dynamic matrix assignment; even if it was negligible in terms of time, it
>> generated code, for every different expression type we assigned, which could
>> be non-negligible.
>
> make sense to me too.
>
> gael.
>