| Re: [eigen] matrix exponential with c++0x |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] matrix exponential with c++0x
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:30:17 -0500
- 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=4o3C+qmYSBYsLQPeDsWxdbqr5Z1tDtDPq9sqXE0+fgg=; b=AeB2cwnE0RYWwr7rC7S2iE7oDz2Y9mAtt4Y02rytAELq22J2KUaDmkFWaBtQsV1YG9 UC8VxlCqsG3WbE1abt0E2ZpeHxQ6iOeCLlpz46mNLX0yacCrwby/sxMlJZawQQh431Fs kIlkd/YP1ILUZyfWPf98i1+CXf4hFMxzIYYZQ=
- 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=mgjpnN7Cs7n6Th2+GAy83gx1DNfMkomCHa2C1n6+65QTYRwl23U/K16bgBIbDOvoq7 8+52Nt4AekPGNmBJiBndSZaNKVpJ9o/uqPhFCOf+rdz7/m98HR5eqHpyBEfTMWFrVxSk v0jD1lbEJKw3GMtXj0opRJgM6cuB6CtlOykKg=
2009/12/3 Mark Borgerding <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 12/03/2009 11:40 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/3 mmoll<Markus.Moll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>>>
>>> Just a side note: avoid all names like _UnderscoreUppercase and
>>> doubleunderscore__anywhere, they are reserved for the library
>>> implementation. With something as generic as _Functor I see a real
>>> danger of collision there (_Functor could be an arbitrarily mean
>>> macro...).
>>> (But I wouldn't recommend using _EigenAvoidNameClashFunctor either)
>>>
>>
>> I know, but we already have many of those, and it's rather convenient.
>> The other problem is that even if we adhere to that rule, we're still
>> not save from conflicts, for example standard library implementations
>> tend to define many preprocessor symbols without that convention, e.g.
>> 'minor' on GCC... So far our attitude was just to cross fingers and in
>> case of conflict, work on a case by case basis...
>>
>>
>
> No one asked for my opinion, but I'll give it anyway.
>
> My best practice is to use template parameters like:
>
> template < typename T_Data1, int T_Param1>
>
> The "T_" makes them stand out in the code and would seem to mitigate the
> name collision problems we are seeing.
I just found back this email "accidentally" and it sounds like a good
idea! We already do m_ for members.
Benoit
>
> -- Mark
>
>
>
>
>