Re: [boost] different matrix library?

DE wrote:
> but by the phrase 'arbitrary size' i mean varying at runtime
It could. Like you know, loading data from a fiel which size is unkown 
and can vcary.
All those scenarii are valid :
* fully dynamic size, dynamic allocation
* fully static size, dynamic allocation
* fully static size, static allocation


> for 3d rotation one should consider quaterninons - not a matrix
>   
We're speaking of users land here. They have the right to choose w/e 
structure they want.
Some API requires you to work with matrix to buidl rotations and except 
some kind of float** later.
> and explain please what you mean by unrollin? loop unrolling?
>   
Yes
> so far i suggest separate classes for vector and matrix and a general
> abstraction for order >2
> vector (column) and matrix would have common public interface while
> less common high order entities would be represented by some tensor<>
> template or whatever with general interface
I won't discuss this. I have my view on this matter that are given by my 
own target audience (formar matlab user that want speed).
So well, i can just tell you that the less class to manipualte, the 
happier the users.

-- 
___________________________________________
Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor
PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI
Tel : (+33)1 69 15 66 35