|Re: [eigen] [patch] LDLt decomposition with rank-deficient matrices|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] [patch] LDLt decomposition with rank-deficient matrices
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 22:10:21 -0400
- 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=oKnFrLz4m+JGZmqEvfVwGdGWwmVbuW069NIC4RQg2v0=; b=HjpOxgjWaHNmp3gk+Xt+sFA48MnqD3WvFisQ3i5Q1NprUa83hd6GN9o15PKP71ptZd BdF/nSDT18hTkbwxb08DVve7ljJqaBoy/qdKxVHCCw1T5DZC60TVsPXU1J6pSBRBheFl PH7oIz2slJEZNY9RljamfL9IjpkYArX1hl6Aw=
- 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=JNL0u41qDQ75QwBfqHQ8wDOUj+SfC3MbhjEdOUlUK4Iyh6hsQF1BJF5vHNy7DX1gey RjMH9ln6x0BJB8zFGbYI924OHERR2G0OWJwI2WMchocfrcF0hMvDKv2hMvoCZ9NBYKOV RrXfI7iEHkNJ+6Vvm+4tHom3rcaAhBuJOqnkA=
2010/6/20 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Ben Goodrich <bgokgm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gael Guennebaud
>> <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> hm, on the other hand for other decompositions (e.g., QR) we have
>>> separate classes, so maybe it makes sense to have a separate class as
>>> well ? (they can possibly share the same implementation)
>> It does not make too much difference to me whether there are separate
>> classes. Would it be sufficient to just add a flag to the class
>> definition, so that the methods could verify whether the decomposition
>> used pivoting or not?
> yes, it's just a matter of consistency over Eigen's API.
> Benoit, do you have an opinion ?
I have a very slight preference for different class names, since as
you mention, this is what we have in other decs.
No strong opinion :)