[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is there anything else that should be fixed for 2.9.5 or 2.1.73?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: Is there anything else that should be fixed for 2.9.5 or 2.1.73? |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:53:37 -0500 |
On 21-Mar-2006, David Bateman wrote:
| John W. Eaton wrote:
|
| >On 19-Mar-2006, David Bateman wrote:
| >
| >| 2) Add an argument to the solve code that is just there for the dmsolve
| >| function to prevent ::solve from recalling dmsolve. This is slightly
| >| ugly, but perhaps less than the above.
| >
| >Would this be the simplest thing to do until we can find a better
| >solution?
| >
| >| 3) Try and rewrite the dmsolve template functions as a template class or
| >| as part of the SparseMatrix class itself. In the first case, the class
| >| can be made a friend of SparseMatrix and SpaseComplexMatrix,and the
| >| second it implicitly as access. This seems to be a relatively large
| >| change for limited gain, and I'm not sure that I can do it without code
| >| duplication, which was the reason to write the code as a template
| >| function in the first place.
| >
| >What are the problems with declaring the function as a friend? Can
| >you give a small example that shows what you want or what causes
| >trouble?
| >
| >jwe
| >
| Ok, then what about the attached patch..
Seems OK to me. Please check it in, then I will make the 2.9.5
snapshot.
Thanks,
jwe