Re: [eigen] Unifying decomposition interfaces

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In such an extreme case as 2x2, eventually we want to have fixed-size
> specializations for all decompositions.

For the 2x2 Eigenvalue decomposition case I have well tested routines.
How do you intend to do the specialization? Specialize compute() only
via an external struct with a run-method (as it is e.g. done in the
Transform class)? Just wondering...

> I just had a look at LU and have 2 remarks.
> a) we'll have to decide how to guard against using an uninitialized
> decomposition. I would like to advocate using ei_assert(). In
> decompositions that store a pointer to the original matrix, this is a
> great thing to test for. Otherwise add a bool m_initialized member.

Do you propose every single function to be safe-guarded or is it fine
when some functions return empty matrices or similar return values
indicating that something is handled the wrong way?

> b) you name the pointer m_pOriginalMatrix. So far we didn't do the
> "p". I would advocate m_originalMatrix: the compiler takes care
> already of checking that we're remembering that it's a pointer (so we
> must use ->...)


- Hauke

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+