| [eigen] Indexes: why signed instead of unsigned? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [eigen] Indexes: why signed instead of unsigned?
- From: Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 15:26:17 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id; bh=z84Qt3qXNvoVcpTPik1trapjS9aAGE1tkl9US/MwH9M=; b=KMBgYAhhK22KSzjPv68HvwfGnmZVp/lKNEKmPHgPdASTU05xpSTaaJMsUkSxnyrxVY QfLivWBbHcqdnt48Hq1LBJuUKsv+657MMyj/Kg5w/nfOin3VYkzQcxdlgHk6dzCoqBAI GdI/XEID7hgCp985tv/DJb9dheTyOutrXpqjk=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=EVfAWSqzhchcqVprkIv7TRfWIDmGpvuuxsuohGwIHXsxXl+vX3yH6p415kpyNpFNFL ah8cu7HNPLMM86EmLgua+s/RdgqhI3TO632AzIjts2YcQIKyZdaXyjBnrMrr0fsNclnF t5mAihCnrSzemi/xtG3xnBAoahr1cMRuFcZHM=
First of all, thanks for putting this library together. It certainly took
(and still takes) quite a lot of time and energy to build it and the end
result is a extremely useful library which is both simple to use and also
extremely efficient. Certainly I'm not alone when I say thanks for putting this
code together.
Having said that, while I browsed through the code I've noticed that Eigen has
been written using signed integers for it's indexes. Is there any reason
behind this design choice?
Thanks for the help,
Rui Maciel