Charles R Harris wrote: > > > Templates are a godsend for containers and such using multiple types. > I think that much of Numpy could be naturally written up that way. Using template makes wrapping the API by another language almost impossible. This alone is a pretty good argument against using C++ at all (this is actually one of the reason I stopped using it for most of my projects). The numpy approach is in my opinion much better: provides a good and complete C API. You can always put a C++ api on top of it, which is much easier than the contrary (putting a C api around a C++ API).
> > I found the performance of ublas to be pretty good for small arrays > when it was compiled with the -NODEBUG option, the assembly code > looked pretty good too. The default with all the bounds checking and > such is terrible and the assembly code practically unreadable (180 > character function identifiers, etc), but for debugging it did its job. I am sure I tested with the -NODEBUG, because I remembered having looked for an array container which does bound checking using a compilation option. It is quit likely that the library was much improved since I looked the last time. cheers, David _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
