"Matthias Troyer" <troyer@phys.ethz.ch> wrote in message news:2F2BAA4A-9540-49EF-80F5-3E22D0A6B615@phys.ethz.ch...
On 16 Feb 2007, at 19:47, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
"Matthias Troyer" <troyer@phys.ethz.ch> wrote in message news:B503A931-963F-4F5B-8DCF-C6617D48EAAD@phys.ethz.ch...
On 16 Feb 2007, at 19:24, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Anyway. IMO almost any solution would be good enough for me. v.update() would work either.
Why is
acc(v);
a problem if
v.update();
is fine?
I never said it's a problem. But from what understand it's completely different thing. acc(0) would be more close to v += 0; acc(v) is more like v *= 2;
Now I'm really confused. acc is the accumulator, recording features like sum,min, max, mean, median, variance. In what sense is acc(0) like v +=0 and acc(v) like v *= 2????
Umm. I maybe wrong. Here is correct correspondence (<==> means equivalent): accumulator_set<....> acc; tracked_var<....> v; acc(s1) ; <==> v = s1; acc(s2) ; <==> v = s1; acc(s3) ; <==> v = s3; v+=s1 doesn't really have anything corresponding in current interface. Maybe something like this: T value = 0; accumulator_set<....> acc; tracked_var<....> v; value += s1; v += s1; <==> acc(value); value += s2; v += s2; <==> acc(value); value += s3; v += s3; <==> acc(value); value -= s4; v -= s4; <==> acc(value); value += 0; v += 0; <==> acc(value); If you think this as collecting samples of some variable values v+=0 look pretty natural. if you think about it as accumulating set of values acc(value) looks better. Doesn't matter to me either way. It still does the same thing. Gennadiy