| Re: [eigen] Eigen::FFT and Eigen::Complex in repo |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Eigen::FFT and Eigen::Complex in repo
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:25:36 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UK5k5mCq8Q2lyqiThzsISMEZquOP/VWRNdx2qsVY0tQ=; b=wq3KZEzrskvdmLs/RunpQATttDlvkVZSgMykVXq4+aoHCJ1MhQKSW4NTPN3UOU1qRX VmXwAU2IRlm76NhvPW+8fk+uRo6RD4G2krOOcNpRKBqDee1f+YtGCLg0wramniIc8XWP PiRiPZB4unGUhFITtwiLeQx/3JwKsyiHR35rs=
- 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=QZYh0wve/JIeO11v9sfoSMRDu6lHC6WgNYOqCpjS+HL9r7HMFJuM/kHLFkgihRZpu0 +VbOpqfYMeTHzTzY8KFPW3QXXbRkz7pqIBXhPzV7vJMfGwTL4/dE7ym5zuTUlM+3O48J n7PeHGpdDUuJ99Q4odY7LZMnr1uudJwZxrxto=
ok ok, i don't care that much :)
perhaps we could allow both, by keeping Eigen and then doing
namespace ei { using namespace Eigen; }
(need to try)
Benoit
2009/10/21 Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> I agree, Eigen is much less hackish than 'ei' (which is already used as prefix,
> if not as namespace, in some places, btw)
>
> I vote to keep Eigen:: :-)
> I could stand 'eigen::' though.
>
> Well, actually, i would probably survive and even be happy in life even with
> ei::, that's right.
>
> my 2cents,
> Thomas
>
> In data mercoledì 21 ottobre 2009 17:09:26, Rohit Garg ha scritto:
>> Please no. Eigen is so much better than "ei" :| AFAIK, major c++
>> libraries (apart from perhaps the stl) avoid unix like naming
>> conventions :)
>
>
> --
> Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> http://www.freehackers.org/thomas
>
>
>