Re: [eigen] inverse() method for TriangularView class?

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]

I don't think there's a big reason not to do it, it's just that
probably few people have felt a need for it so far. For most tasks,
solve() is a better tool than inverse().

How big is the speed difference between triangular.solve(rhs) and
triangular*rhs ?

If you would like this functionality to be implemented, you could file
a bug, explain your use case, and give a simple benchmark result
showing a performance advantage for  triangular*rhs over


2011/10/31 Douglas Bates <bates@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> The TriangularView class has solve methods but not an explicit inverse
> method, which could be as simple as
> solve(DenseMatrixType::Identity(cols(), cols())) (at least I think
> that is how one would write the general form, but I'm not sure).  If
> one wanted to get fancier there may be a slight advantage in taking
> account of the triangularity of the returned value and solving reduced
> linear systems for each column, as is done in the Lapack *trtri
> subroutines.
> Has such a method been considered, or even implemented and I have
> somehow managed to overlook it?

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+