|Re: [eigen] How to resize a partially fixed matrix|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] How to resize a partially fixed matrix
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:12:02 +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=FJ8wF4/WiJA+BBexD+2YXsjzowUl2AYxJc+dkIwzoe4=; b=KHkHk5du+mmxgA9oR66jFb7Iom24HfV5e4O+u32+d0rKZEJKjgfM4NmOatLRejY0f4 Uhpg/fqaiQZiwbx+e02NI6ylFlaioHpK0tYMH7Y8Of78LiK2Lqu+9Cjvkl0G+xI9k9Av x++ZfMEsEsjekYcB5NfRWN0klruwhO+YmiJIw=
- 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=LiuL95vAJyGccYcQ4so5Y4djelYF2qts+yhkrhNEggU5jUAlFaqyToSQjlrA6A0j1w OuCXxqZS8SxiAo7Jqrs27RXyRlodYGakKSndwRO06dRLY/1S43uBxWcMJSK6E828j5Xz no/JWBT4SSlsErg0qbVP4iT71i/xOcvMtHD30=
2009/6/24 Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 2009/6/24 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Helmut
>> Jarausch<jarausch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I wonder how I can resize a matrix where one of the dimension is fixed,
>>> Matrix<double,4,Eigen::Dynamic> MS_BC;
>>> MS_BC.resize(5); // this fails
>> yes it fails because resize(int size) is for vector only.
>>> but this works
>>> but it's not logical?
>> well that depends. First of all it is very clear that
>> MS_BC.resize(4,5) *must* work. Now about allowing resize(int size) to
>> work on such matrices why not. I guess that the main use case for such
>> matrices is to use a Matrix to store a collection of small vectors,
>> and so the matrix can be seen as a std::vector, and so having
>> resize(int size) working makes sense. On the other hand, in that case
>> the parameter "size" will mean either the number of rows or the number
>> of cols depending on the context that is not very nice. So there are
>> pro and cons, but eventually I'm 51% ok to extend resize to partially
>> dynamic matrices.
> Same here. It's the second time in a few days that people ask for
> something like that, so i'd be OK to do this just to make our API
> match what people expect. The "list of vectors" argument is good too.
> And after all it doesn't look that dangerous.
> But then we should do the same for other functions, for consistency:
> - at least other Matrix methods like constructors, setZero...
> - static MatrixBase methods like Zero...
> more generally all methods that take size parameters!
I tried to do that change and now I think that it's very nontrivial:
not sure anymore that it's a good move!
Here's what makes me change my mind. Look at what happens when you do:
How to interprete this? Should this be a NOP or a failed assertion?
There are many such issues in Matrix.h alone and I am afraid that any
way to allow that will result in a much more complex Matrix.h and less