|Re: [eigen] new tutorial on writing functions taking Eigen types as paramters|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] new tutorial on writing functions taking Eigen types as paramters
- From: Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:22 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/K8j0s0jJofa2iPK5/gmk/9vpQiQzoZrMOFBklxkOxk=; b=HBzbkVdiPFGDv+RFrxxE6/4g/iI00zhbX1FslddbeKoGDn1huO3Wh7kroxK3ZZHD9Y SJEbSBGHNDMkScSW8ZkS6xAEoX1Qc5EERBh1rqoiUCc3FUTIl1fKrZAgCcEgLv89VunU 8JHZpUStFuLHzZ3dTbWM9sLHi+vaa9xF4xm4A=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QM5oZpWo+F82pe+wCtrUdYP1aJJv5WHdNM2iOqqpGzTo5QFMZWlx+GKfO5b5htcrJe GP38//ygaArkfhhC6d4tLkrOFTADH/aiFIbaFfAw0/AviazSGyG7j+Yo7Qyx+ejaF3Bc nRU1AeEyMLYDkRDhU91BFjsmc3dsxDoguWSVk=
Oh man - posted on the wrong thread. Sorry.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Hauke Heibel
> The failing test fail in 32 bit mode and it is related to the
> alignment test of Map. It is so cryptic, that I don't get what is
> going on.
> && "data is not aligned");
> How about a simple
> ((size_t)m_data % 16 ==0)) && "data is not aligned");
> Just wondering?
> - Hauke
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Gael Guennebaud
> <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Note that since the only values that will ever be used are 1,2,Dynamic, we
>>> could also make typedefs for them, so that in 99.9% of cases one wouldn't
>>> need the template keyword.
>> good point. Moreover, with the current cost model, it is enough to
>> expose only the cases where N==1 and N==Dynamic. Even for the simplest
>> expression 2*m, if N=2, then it gets evaluated.
>> Of course, to be future proof it would still make sense to expose the
>> N=2 case but others are really useless, so what about defining only
>> the following three types (without the generic template one):
>> typedef typename ei_nested<Derived,1>::type Nested;
>> typedef typename ei_nested<Derived,2>::type NestedForTwoAccess;
>> typedef typename ei_nested<Derived,Dynamic>::type NestedForMultipleAccess;
>> alternative names: NestedOnce, NestedTwice, NestedManyTimes ???