| Re: [eigen] NoChange_t, Sequential_t, etc. |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] NoChange_t, Sequential_t, etc.
- From: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 23:15:12 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SXreraFr8S8XTHPQKUDyZyxPgyZ5U9BGhvb6OhEBCoY=; b=aiUqgLDnDm+s/CS2kPt2+x5TtSjE7bvg9B2U8Ewke61KqJfdYig5bRWL9hBx2DRy2Q GDrTg81YukaiubUTCG8FUYHc/DJaFWDSl1NxozbRmQDVWTJpiF3XgTyx7hkDn31sqmAH I7YBG+jD14fRMmfhPvNVdE/UscVYsZW4G1+J8GJzUqrLkzUguKjrhNenTXyIqp39Ncac H+c+Igwnyr0Vk5RT0/pm+BmTLRvrfxUg0km46up8dI0lqlDzQ73jP2OTuLQccxmI2l4F hZ6KwRoayK6/3xWHbq+YOpe/fYRjvRM5kCTXRlwH0aAyl4OnCRttWc12dhkxQ7HwdpNW D+pg==
Hi,
I don't understand how that's equivalent? If Sequential is a type and
not an object then we would have to use Sequential() instead of
Sequential only, and so change the API.
gael
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Hauke Heibel
<hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> are there any objections of removing the global variables
>
> struct Sequential_t {};
> namespace {
> EIGEN_UNUSED Sequential_t Sequential;
> }
>
> and replacing them by
>
> struct Sequential {};
>
> I started using Eigen with the Intel compiler and I am getting many
> warnings regarding unused variables and there is no easy way to remove
> those.
>
> I am quite sure, the "trick" above is anyways a remnant from C which
> should not be required anymore. If it is still needed we could at
> least typedef define the structs.
>
> Regards,
> Hauke
>
>