On 06/23/11 08:08, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
On Wednesday, June 22, 2011, Brian Smith wrote:
There is also Boost.MultiArray, has the overlap with that library been addressed already?
In terms of the way in which the two libraries create and manipulate storage there's no overlap. Ultimately they serve the same purpose, however, Boost.MultiArray doesn't provide statically allocated arrays
I'm not sure that's true. I've never tried it, but multi_array_ref "provides the MultiArray interface over any contiguous block of elements" so it seems like you could create one of those which uses statically allocated storage.
and generally provides poorer performance.
Is that assertion based on actual testing (with NDEBUG defined), or is there some by-design reason your performance would be better?
IIUC, Brian's templates provide something akin to: template < typename T , std::size_t... Lengths
struct array ; corresponding to multi_array's: template < typename T , std::size_t NumDims
struct multi_array ; where T serves the same purpose as multi_array's T and sizeof...(Lengths) = multi_array's NumDims and the Lengths, instead of being passed to the CTOR, as in multiarray and being runtime values, are specified as compile-time constants. Is that *about* right Brian? -regards, Larry