|Re: [eigen] still the solve() API debate|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] still the solve() API debate
- From: Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:01:41 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=9tTFaU4v4itUmH8n/vfRLnY85OykwgOEcIZq0GVBdPE=; b=KI51gHe2Ny2X94bhlA2G2S8kufkxEFe+M5Oc7UHsVjwsIlnSLK57n1MsyaKLsU8haM ZERKOoh8XkMIj/inhqLzHUWGG7KOF+qgf9IayIkyNbtnTleVrTL8RvQvmwYumutIUm/S Xs60R4gOn6+Uv3cmxxq7r4PDuUCvojyGWUzLA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=D5seFzCPhIXZZwXQ57+wXUQJ8tryehD3b4cdO9pwLvdhkYI6mgVYLs4U1Kpr3Bw6Kb /j27nazwwUbJ2JiAH7xWydDoIZMLABFUjfURwq5k1Zs8SEM+MNntSmJ+gECnwoNYSVQA hcovA6oYIO6y+eYYOtqAwEfBDXccEx6R8hCF4=
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
Yes, it's probably a good idea to enable using c++0x features
This would go into Core/util/Macros.h.
I did that now. I also adapted the StaticAssert header accordingly such that it will detect VC10. Maybe all those tests should be done in the Macros header or even in a separate header - similar to what boost does for each compiler. Otherwise we will start writing redundant checks for e.g. C++0x features.
I was considering that not having a configured header was a feature,
not a lack.
After thinking a bit about it I totally agree - why would you want somebody to force to use CMake for a header only lib.