[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Eigen/FFT
- From: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:22:57 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gZb4fdPX5L69mCvaMUO6emPNVjZvts5x9fOB/bAbfwI=; b=Jxkf+4lP0bao4Au1NUg/0zEX7ftueJvpS2At7x2aGDpEo6+nL/n/c+ipDCtDN/r2kb /hCNi5w3A5IzY2wxVx0Mc+1R0y4hVUHzrEZ3w4/QS0DPy2GqbWiWLFNe2itywoMgRl0D ySjsrDSZReN7LMn6m/UFvKpyUqBuSv/9qtHlQ=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dSvLF70vaKNVUIbdKjRwxm669FipYYXeULHSiRTWs3dzerEJTHmVTYPytCiTzJ/JXt uTGNEL5tb0N4/3J6RL/7u++L4fobSTU7j4r0CoM0nYNGGBBkv8ZTo7xhYmIGlP6p4Uwk +gByzWepRkLjoV3AI5UMUBBHu2vH4g5zaUz/o=
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Benoit Jacob<jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2009/6/23 Tim Hutt <tdhutt@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> I think the default behavior of Eigen/FFT should favor correctness and generality over speed.
>>
>>>> 1) Scaling:
>>>> Other libraries (FFTW,IMKL,KISSFFT) do not perform scaling, so there is a constant gain incurred after the forward&inverse transforms , so IFFT(FFT(x)) = Kx; this is done to avoid a vector-by-value multiply.. The downside is that algorithms that worked correctly in Matlab/octave don't behave the same way once implemented in C++.
>>
>> Simple solution, have FFT(x) and FFT_unscaled(x). That way people
>> won't be surprised by the results but they can still be optimised
>
> +1
if there is no true advantage in knowing that at compile time, I'd
prefer to see only one function:
FFT(..., int options = 0)
possible usages: FFT(x), FFT(x, Eigen::Unscaled), ...
I'm sure needs for other options will come.
gael
> Benoit
>
>
>