| Re: [eigen] Indexes: why signed instead of unsigned? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Indexes: why signed instead of unsigned?
- From: Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:56:20 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Jo1hOjHvqIUNz7uP67JMMb2Q1lWeJKEBnDMewig992E=; b=geDy42fNMT1YpiYchV82A8HqsIuM2u52WbuLl8oYHbiSc0v+7PS+MHkJm+2C7qYdER X0xO4yzfm1hNEKSkCLB62O1kjBqR0OuDVNV8giWiOWpqd9XxzWoT7nmu3qYvT94X8+OW QxU+/0pfJxEnTSjpyyUAZgDAmwMmvU7lw7HIU=
- 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=Ahz1Tw1PYHxUA9iG5k9p9aHl82YIDGsJlnYhVnRMxdBHunbs03tfI76HaR2BGTloOL BZzjwoTOpec1+lJKm1fUoae0KxcNATTboV8XXeN/fYaY7EOOASXwQHcNKfxEqFTnBD19 SXqAY1Hyvz+b0gKnjgWM0k7VVzr1P8H3Msi24=
On 11 May 2010 16:01, Rohit Garg <rpg.314@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This will become an issue when people start using bigger datasets than
> 2GB. At a minimum, we need a eigen_size_t typedef somewhere for easy
> portability. Using long throughout in 32 bit machines doesn't make
> sense.
But wasn't size_t developed exactly with that use in mind?
Rui Maciel