On 04/30/2013 01:19 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
On 04/30/2013 12:56 PM, Ed Meyer wrote:
Not only is it desirable to have sparse and full matrices behave
similarly,
I believe the user should not need to be aware of which storage format
is used so functions like eig() would work for either.
The key is to use the C++ class system to have different implementations
for each storage format.
I haven't been following this thread closely and I haven't thought
much about the details but I have no objection to trying to do a
better job with handling numel and dimensions/indices generally.
Is there some way we can get the better behavior in a minimally
invasive way?
Even if it requires significant changes, maybe we should consider what
the options are anyway.
What changes are needed to make octave_idx_type behave the way you way
you want?
jwe
It would be good to give some thought to the trade-off of "fixing" the
current system
against completing the 64bit compiling system. The 64bit system will be
useful in
other ways and should be done in any case. Of course, any improvement
in the
current system is good, but the full implementation of large matrices
could be a
64bit system feature.
Jordi seemed to think that 2^63 indicies would work with "no trouble" in
the 64bit
system...
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
