|Re: [eigen] backporting the vectorized quaternion product to 2.0 ?|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] backporting the vectorized quaternion product to 2.0 ?
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:25:48 -0400
- 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; bh=J3OoqaiHbBRiwPNPuWoTrBxxHaT80hvGEfc5UJgyzCI=; b=xttNh2K7Y+h2SQBLHsuyYTa1VnCRPBzo5APQsTTxlb9SYPbMoT3y1DG9hbxqEXFGco H3aNau5/FXO5BK/l+HtUdgbPtqMxXOVeAC9HF64x5J820PtdHVS5nXAaWKyLC7YJaf6D HsCqGlQY/27uEiN+7z2YIzf91i2cheu478oRY=
- 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; b=BuouCXNnF2jXse51vSL0ahHa6+frq+JnZy4iPNrEl+yd/p1ucLihYt/9kOa7z97Oc+ f35NzIikIcTVO/5eZQrsLNHmIuCGzzChaoFrQWz1E6jz6bY1dIlhTgiBXLp8NPNjnC2t efKKX0iJ9xLdtNMqGx0bpDCGP1aQ3l0Nhr+XI=
2009/9/22 Rohit Garg <rpg.314@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> 1) it's not dangerous as long as it's covered by a unit test
>> 2) it's a cool feature and as the next major version takes a long time
>> to prepare, it's nice to backport some cool features.
> I suggest that eigen should adopt a quick release philosophy. The gap
> between 2.0 and the devel branch is now too much. It is fun to code on
> the devel branch, but it is likely that such need for backports will
> only increase. While a kernel style release system is out of the
> question, I would certainly suggest that we move towards incremental
> releases to avoid doing the same work 1.5 times.
That said, I completely agree with you that we shouldn't backport too
much, as in the long term it's only a waste of time.
I'm only backporting your code, in this case, because I enjoy to. That
doesn't have to set a rule.