[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] solve API
- From: Manoj Rajagopalan <rmanoj@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:11:26 -0400
- Organization: EECS Dept., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Hi Frank,
I was suggesting that inverse() should return an expression-template and
not the computed inverse. The mapping of inverse-computation followed by
multiplication to the LU-procedure, during the assignment stage, can be done
using expression-templates - an advanced C++ technique.
cheers!
Manoj
On Monday 28 June 2010 11:15:26 am FMDSPAM wrote:
> Just my 2 cent:
>
> I know, that expression do not have to be evaluated but nevertheless
> I would try to avoid the word "inverse()", because of lession #1: "Never
> use matrix inversion".
>
> What about
>
> x = b * A.adjoint().lu().invertor() (like benoit's solver())
>
> But cleaner for me to read is, what Manoj suggesting:
> > x = solve(A,b); // left
> > x = solve(b,A); // right
> > x = solve(b, A.triangularView<Lower>()); // Gael's example
>
> It's OK to read and understand w/o scarring about "inverse()" too.
>
> --Frank