Hi Aleksey, You are confusing the matrix abstraction with the multi-dimensional array abstraction. A *linear algebra* algorithm will never need to be generalized in the fashion you advocate below. That's because matrices are about systems of equations. A system of equations has a certain number of unknowns and a certain number of equations. Once the system is represented as a matrix, the number of rows corresponds to the number of equations, and the number of columns corresponds to the number of unknowns. That's it. There's no more numbers to talk about. Another way to look at this is to focus on the mathematical concept *Linear Operator*. A linear operator is something that you can multiply with a vector of a certain size to get another vector of a certain size. The "number of columns" of the linear operator is the required size of the input vector, and the "number of rows" of the linear operator is the required size of the output vector. Best Regards, Jeremy On Jul 5, 2004, at 6:04 PM, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
Neither 'size1' nor 'num_rows' are generic, though. What you want is something like
template< int n > size(int_<n>);
The particular int_<n> specializations then can be typedef'ed to something more mnemonic, e.g.
typedef int_<0> rows;
or even
extern int_<0> rows;
The lack of this genericity will force you, sooner or later, to resort to code duplication. I believe Vesa made the same point a long time ago... yep: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/60338.
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Jeremy Siek <jsiek@osl.iu.edu> http://www.osl.iu.edu/~jsiek Ph.D. Candidate, Indiana University Bloomington C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org) _______________________________________________