|Re: [eigen] Feature suggestion: interior row and column ranges [patch attached]|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Feature suggestion: interior row and column ranges [patch attached]
- From: Manoj Rajagopalan <rmanoj@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:46:30 -0400
- Organization: EECS Dept., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
=> For consistency, topRows() --> topBlock(), leftCols() --> leftBlock()
(e) rowSlice() (data visualization terminology)
=> For consistency, topRows() --> topSlice(), leftCols() --> leftSlice()
(f) rowPanel() (following Goto's nomenclature)
=> For consistency, topRows() --> topPanel(), leftCols() --> leftPanel()
BTW, the (start,count) spec for the rows or cols can be changed to
(start,1+end) or (start,end) and "range" still used without loss of clarity.
For example rowRange(3,6) or rowRange(3,5) for rows 3,4,5 (0-based indexing).
On Sunday 27 June 2010 09:04:49 am Benoit Jacob wrote:
> Another extremely important point in favor of "middle" is that it was
> already used in the BASIC keyword MID to get a substring in a string.
> 2010/6/27 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > Thanks for all these proposals.... I had the same feeling than you
> > regarding the word "range" which, for me, is implicitly defined by a
> > start and end positions instead of a start+count. Like Manoj,
> > middleRows makes me think that the rows are centered. The word "inner"
> > is already used to speak about inner/outer vectors or inner/outer
> > strides. So using innerRows would be too confusing. Sorry to be so
> > negative ;) so finally among all these proposals, middleRows is maybe
> > the least worse....
> > gael
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 11:01 AM, FMDSPAM <fmdspam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> As you said: Ideally the naming is clash free, consistent and of little
> >> surprise.
> >> Because I didn't know Eigen or the English language well enough I'm
> >> totally undecided.
> >> But let me post some Sunday morning thoughts:
> >> geometric names:
> >> topRows - middleRows - bottomRows, leftCols - middleCols - rightCols
> >> block names:
> >> topRows - blockRows - bottomRows, leftCols - blockCols -
> >> rightCols
> >> sequential names:
> >> startRows - innerRows - endRows, startCols - innerCols - endCols
> >> or
> >> firstRows - middleRows - lastRows, firstCols - middleCols - lastCols
> >> oldie names: headRows - ???Rows - tailRows
> >> What, if there are range expression object types? Would that be possible
> >> w/o runtime costs?:
> >> Something in the lines of:
> >> blockRange<startrow, endrow, startcol, endcol> brange
> >> indexRange<start, end> irange
> >> topRows(3) -> blockRange brange1(1,3,Dynamic,Dynamic)
> >> bottomRows(3) -> blockRange brange2(-3,-1,Dynamic,Dynamic)
> >> innerRows(3,2) -> blockRange brange3(3,3+2,Dynamic, Dynamic)
> >> =>
> >> cout << "A(3..5,:) =\n" << A(brange3) << endl;
> >> or
> >> indexRange<3,2> irange1;
> >> cout << "A(3..5,:) =\n" << A.rows(irange1) << endl;
> >> Cheers
> >> Frank
> >> P.S.
> >> I'm eager